PDA

View Full Version : Desired Changes with Scarlet..



brandon thomas
04-14-2008, 09:59 AM
1. Interchangeable lenses.

WesVasher
04-14-2008, 10:04 AM
I say keep the fixed lens for the market they are targeting.

Andreas Fernbrant
04-14-2008, 10:07 AM
I'd say nikon mount!

brandon thomas
04-14-2008, 10:11 AM
i'd say ship it with it's 8x lens, but have the option to switch it out for nikon canon or b4.. just to have options.. like the new sony ex3. or even different red branded lenses if they choose to go that route. an 8x lens sounds very limiting.

gotta keep up with your competition.... so to speak...

although i say that the lens thing is the only option in my mind it's currently lacking.. i'm sure the lack of mention of audio options was just an oversight.. or just not yet implemented at this stage in development.

Gene Crucean
04-14-2008, 10:14 AM
I agree... ship the current one as the stocker, but with a nikon mount.

I also want a bigger sensor.

jeff.a
04-14-2008, 10:14 AM
1. Interchangeable lenses
[ 2. Delivery date Q3 or Q4 2008 :biggrin: ]

Lappe767
04-14-2008, 10:15 AM
Or sell two models, one with fixed lens one without.

I do not ever want to use another 35mm adapter again, I'll gladly shell out more $$$ to have interchangeable lenses.

Andreas Fernbrant
04-14-2008, 10:17 AM
I also would want a less sony handycam like form factor.

Johan Malmsten
04-14-2008, 10:18 AM
The only thing I can say I'm a little dissapointed about is the lack of interchangeable lenses...

But... pffft... for that price... I'll take it, regardless of sound... I'll shoot MOS if I have to just to get all of those other stuff on Redcode Raw solid state recording... :)

James T Mather
04-14-2008, 10:18 AM
then buy a red one.

brandon thomas
04-14-2008, 10:20 AM
i can live with the smaller chip.. as long as i have the option to change lenses.. i agree.. no more 35mm adapters..

i'd definitely pay way more..

but i'd love a red camera to use all my nikon glass with..

Lappe767
04-14-2008, 10:37 AM
As the brochure says, "specifications, delivery dates and design are subject to change... count on it"

I'm sure if the demand for interchangeable lenses keeps growing for the Scarlet, expect a change :)

kylegherman
04-14-2008, 10:39 AM
Add zoom and focus rings on the lens and I am sold.

brandon thomas
04-14-2008, 10:43 AM
then buy a red one.


i'm pretty sure the point of scarlet was to let in the group of people, myself included, who can't afford to invest in a red one, or even dream of an epic.

the lens on scarlet is the one factor that makes me even consider a different camera.. i've been waiting for scarlet since hearing about the red one for the first time two years ago.

if they make this one concession on scarlet's design it'll make me waiting for 3 years seem worth it.

David Dennis
04-14-2008, 11:05 AM
If it were only available in Fall 2008 I would buy it instead of the Nikon D300 I'm planning for.

Guess I'll have to wait until next year before I get my RED ... but I'm definitely looking forward to it - it sounds perfect for the kinds of shooting I like to do.

D

Johan Malmsten
04-14-2008, 11:08 AM
I smell a petition coming... about the lens-issue I mean... :-)

but again... the image qualities from this will be effin' sweet:)

ArthurG
04-14-2008, 11:09 AM
interchangeable lenses +1

Aiden Cornwell
04-14-2008, 11:10 AM
To me if they allowed for interchangeable lenses then it com peats with Red One. For myself the fixed lens is no issue. What I want is recode raw and having 3k instead of 1080p is perfect.

Thom Steinhoff
04-14-2008, 11:11 AM
my thought/hope is that they would sell Scarlett with a fixed lens but on a Red mount platform. That way, just like you can remove the PL mount and put on a Birger, you could remove the fixed lens, put on a PL mount, Birger, Nikon or whatever.

That would certainly be the RED thing to do!!!

Jason Wingrove
04-14-2008, 11:13 AM
NIKON MOUNT GUYS, they said this was meant to be pro. NO fixed lens cam is pro regardless of sensor or rez.

Davide B.
04-14-2008, 11:20 AM
Even with a nikon or PL mount the apparent DOF is going to be about twice what you'd have on the RED one since it's a 2/3 sensor. To get 35mm dof we'd still have to use a 35mm DOF adapter like the Letus or Brevis. But yeah, having the option to use whatever glass we like would be nice.

brandon thomas
04-14-2008, 11:20 AM
i dont think there's a competition with the red one unless they offer a PL mount.

also.. seems CF is the only recording option right now? so that right there to me at least vastly segregates the two cameras.. also.. no one is going to take many people seriously shooting a big project on a camera of this form factor... there will still be plenty of demand for the red one if scarlet has lens options.

also.. any DSLR anywhere near the $3000 range has interchangable lenses.

if they're putting this out with a still shooting option.. you need to be able to change lenses... sure it's not a pro DSLR... but it'd be laughed out even more if they're stuck with an 8x lens.

it's not a consumer camera.. my 6 year old pos sony handycam had a 10x zoom...

Dory Breaux
04-14-2008, 11:24 AM
keep the fixed lens, but please for gods sake make it longer! 8x??? come on guys you can do better then that. The 180fps bursts sold me, and then I saw the 8x and was like "nope not gonna happen." altho if the rumor of a 3000ish price tag is true.... man thats hard to beat. but that short of a lens.....

Michael Schrengohst
04-14-2008, 11:24 AM
RED needs a low end cam and Scarlet is fine,
something between Scarlet & RED for about
$5,500 is needed.
Up design the Scarlet - Nikon mount that
will accept auto-focus lenses and
shoot at least 4K stills in addition to 3K video.

combatentropy
04-14-2008, 11:39 AM
8x??? come on guys you can do better then that.

Red's limit might be size and weight, not cost. For a professional quality lens that covers the 2/3" sensor, more than 8x might be too heavy for a camera this size and that does not rest on the shoulder.

I think 8x is more than enough. More important is the actual focal lengths available.

dhazelrig
04-14-2008, 11:43 AM
Nikon mount...please!!!

No fixed lenses. I need options and flexibility. Selling it without a lens keeps it at a reasonable price point.

Ernesto Salvador
04-14-2008, 11:45 AM
The only thing I can say I'm a little dissapointed about is the lack of interchangeable lenses...

But... pffft... for that price... I'll take it, regardless of sound... I'll shoot MOS if I have to just to get all of those other stuff on Redcode Raw solid state recording... :)

for that price? what price? where did you guys see it? somebdy please tell me how much is it.

Bing Bailey
04-14-2008, 11:48 AM
you gotta look at those specs again

a 2/3 sensor that does redcode raw up to 100MB not mb with a custom designed fixed lens and 1 to 120fps for under 3k

thats unheard of. these will all be snapped up by news depts all over the world. nice and light. very high quality image , greater than hd and probably a great lens. indies will probably love it too. don't forget its a new sensor in line with the new sensor on the epic. which means it could have amazing dynamic range just lower resolution. hell 4k hasn't even hit the mainstream yet. anyone that tells me they've rather use the canon cause you can change lenses over the scarlet is either fibbing or stupid. hell george lucas shot the clone wars on a camera with a 2/3 sensor and it probably wasn't anywhere near the quality that this will be

Gabriel Sanchez
04-14-2008, 11:51 AM
I think Scarlet pretty much met all my expectations, especially at the price that's rumored. It's hard as hell to beat.

Bing Bailey
04-14-2008, 11:51 AM
its going to be $3k

Bing Bailey
04-14-2008, 11:54 AM
course I'm wondering how the hell they are gonna manage to record 100MB to CF Cards when only one card presently is able to manage 28/36MB

David Dennis
04-14-2008, 11:56 AM
Luzazul, there is a rumor floating around that says Scarlet will cost "under $3,000" which of course meant $2,995 or thereabouts.

I suspect they got that from Jim and in view of the specifications I think the price is realistic. I'm not sure why the price is not yet on the web site, but I notice that the site seems awfully minimalist for a product of this type, so maybe they will fill in the details as we come closer to launch.

For someone like me, who's basically a "run and gun" type of shooter, the automatic mode is great and the ability to be more artistic with a manual mode without actually having to do that all the time is great. Interchangeable lenses would have almost certainly meant an all-manual camera, which just would not have been good for run and gun.

I think the idea of this camera was not to compete with RED ONE, but rather to be a good option for highest possible quality run and gun. And looking at this, it seems nearly ideal for the job.

D

Geoff Murillo
04-14-2008, 11:58 AM
I'd love the nikon mount option too, but at this price (if the reports are correct), I'd be fine using a dof adapter (redrock, brevis, etc.).

But what I'm most concerned about is the lack of audio information on the pdf. I'm hoping it's just been left out of the pdf materials to keep them brief. If not, the starting price goes up, if you have to buy or rent a sound recorder.

-Geoff

Dan Hudgins
04-14-2008, 11:59 AM
I'd pay $1k-$2k more if I had the option to change lenses. As it stands right now, I'm disappointed and not interested at all.

The front of the camera MUST be within 10mm of the sensor face so that the lens mount can be changed, or that zoom pulled of so that prime lenses can be used. If they set the sensor too far back in the camera case, it would be a mess to have to saw off much of the front of the camera, I hope they do not mess up this for marketing... that would just lose sales.

william otto
04-14-2008, 12:03 PM
I'll take one. But if it had a nikon mount option- I'd take two.

zecahue
04-14-2008, 12:04 PM
Red's limit might be size and weight, not cost. For a professional quality lens that covers the 2/3" sensor, more than 8x might be too heavy for a camera this size and that does not rest on the shoulder.

I think 8x is more than enough. More important is the actual focal lengths available.

well said dude..

But she could be smaller for a fixed lens cam, something really pocket :-P, just hope its wiiiide very wiiide built in glass.

Ernesto Salvador
04-14-2008, 12:04 PM
I'd settle for Scarlet as it is, I like the auto shoot mode, and just some sort of super wide angle adapter from red.

ScottPictures
04-14-2008, 12:06 PM
Is it possible that is could really NOT record audio?

Say it isn't so!

oldphart
04-14-2008, 12:07 PM
I say keep the fixed lens for the market they are targeting.

Why would somebody who makes a good, professional camera want to target those who use zoom lenses? They can buy a Sony to get the cromatic aberrations they crave.

Craig Schober
04-14-2008, 12:23 PM
Why would somebody who makes a good, professional camera want to target those who use zoom lenses? They can buy a Sony to get the cromatic aberrations they crave.

red is targeting sony directly. why try to outsell the f-23 or f-35 when you can try to outsell the xdcam-ex? fixed lens, 2/3" chip, on-board lcd, solid state recording, handheld-very close to the ex. now add 3k, 100MB/sec, raw at half the price and you have scarlet.

i'll buy one based more on competitive principles than a real need or desire for one.

oldphart
04-14-2008, 12:27 PM
its going to be $3k

Then it will make RED another purveyor of mediocre mass-market cameras like the HDR-FX1. Nobody makes a half-decent zoom lens for $3k, not to mention a metal-body camera to go with it.

I really hoped for something like $7k without a lens.

ColinSmith
04-14-2008, 12:33 PM
I'm another one for selling it with the lens, but being able to unbolt that and fix a Birger mount.....
I'm not so worried about the 8x fixed being too short.... more about it not being wide enough.....

ArthurG
04-14-2008, 12:36 PM
Scarlet will never be a mass market camera. Who can spend 8000$ on a MacPro for editing Red footage ? For this price people can buy a Ex1 more comfortable and reassuring...

Bryan Bishop
04-14-2008, 12:40 PM
Then it will make RED another purveyor of mediocre mass-market cameras like the HDR-FX1. Nobody makes a half-decent zoom lens for $3k, not to mention a metal-body camera to go with it.

Not necessarily -- it depends on how willing they are to squeeze their profit margins. By the look of it, Scarlet will require a lot of accessories, accessories that most of the customers for that camera won't already have, and I'm willing to bet have a pretty juicy mark-up on them.

If Scarlet is a "trojan horse" of sorts, to help proliferation of Redcode as a standard, I could see it being a totally viable part of their business model to sell Scarlet as a loss-leader, making up the profit on the accessory sales, and betting the success of Scarlet eventually translating into Epic, One, and RedRay sales.

Ameer Azari
04-14-2008, 12:47 PM
Scarlet will never be a mass market camera. Who can spend 8000$ on a MacPro for editing Red footage ? For this price people can buy a Ex1 more comfortable and reassuring...

Hi, I've got a budget of $15,000 so I'm pledging $5000 to Scarlet and the other $10,000 to a Mac Pro

Also, will the lens provide good Depth of Field, Because I don't want a crappy normal mid range lens, I'd rather have interchangeables to be fair..

is it 35mm?

Secondly, will Scarlet not do sound? because if that's the case that's bummer, although, I guess if you really wanted sound it could be done on a seperate deck.

BUT TO BE FAIR TO RED

3K for under $3000 is a great deal...I mean, it really is awesome. Definitely reserving it as soon as I can.

Worse comes to worse there's always the Letus35 Extreme adapter?

Overall, impressed, but what's with the design, sorry, but it's a bit lame...I mean, the RED ONE looks awesome, But the EPIC and the SCARLET are a bit like cardboard boxes with black paint...

David Dennis
04-14-2008, 12:48 PM
Arthur, you sound like you're buying memory from Apple. If you take the base system at $2,800 and add about $300 worth of third party memory, it will fly. 1TB drives are about $400 each. My initial editing system might be the base machine + 1TB and 4GB RAM, which I think would go for about $3,600. Not so bad - almost the same price as the camera itself.

Anyway, I think there are enough RED enthusiasts on this forum to make RED Scarlet a hit. They will fan out into the world and people will ask about their cameras, and word will spread.

I doubt that RED can bankrupt Sony but they sure as heck can compete.

I guarantee you that.

D

Stephen Williams
04-14-2008, 12:57 PM
Nikon mount...please!!!

No fixed lenses. I need options and flexibility. Selling it without a lens keeps it at a reasonable price point.

Hi,

A Nikon mount on a 2/3 inch sensor is a total waste of time, Nikon lenses are not wide enough, you would need about a 5 or 6mm wide angle lens.

Stephen

sinoevil
04-14-2008, 01:00 PM
Interchangeable lenses, definitely.

Ameer Azari
04-14-2008, 01:01 PM
Arthur, you sound like you're buying memory from Apple. If you take the base system at $2,800 and add about $300 worth of third party memory, it will fly. 1TB drives are about $400 each. My initial editing system might be the base machine + 1TB and 4GB RAM, which I think would go for about $3,600. Not so bad - almost the same price as the camera itself.
D

Hi, I agree with the third party RAM, but I hear you need at least 16GB worth of RAM to Edit Redcode, also, you haven't factored in displays which are about $1000 each from dell

so you are in fact looking at about an $8000 MAC PRO all things added up, then again, $4000 (Scarlet + Accessories) ain't a bad deal

I hope it comes with a lens but has the option of interchangeable lenses
and also PLEASE THROW IN AUDIO!!!!

John Wee
04-14-2008, 01:02 PM
no good narrative can be done without a shallow DOF and hooking up a third party 35mm adapter is a PITA.

I would pay up to $ 10k for a body only, 35mm sensor shooting 2k or even 1k with interchangeable lens mount and TC IN/OUT with min 2 CF card Modules.

oldphart
04-14-2008, 01:05 PM
Scarlet will never be a mass market camera. Who can spend 8000$ on a MacPro for editing Red footage ? For this price people can buy a Ex1 more comfortable and reassuring...

Remember that a dollar is not worth much any more.
Still, you can get a more powerful non-Apple BSD (or Linux, or even Windows if you prefer) system for half that price. By next year, the used MacPro will go for 3k on eBay.

I am more worried about the cost of the software - my old Avid HD pro does not seem to be meant for 3k editing. Might have to write something myself. :nerd: That would guarantee some delays for sure...

John Wee
04-14-2008, 01:10 PM
Not to mention a 35mm adapter makers have to make sure that their ground glass can spin/vibrate to get rid of the grain at 3k resolution. This will of course open up to RIDICULOUSLY expensive adapter price. For example, Letus is currently testing out their Letus Ultimate 35mm adapter (priced at ~ $4000 dollars) and also they are developing a 2/3" Letus b4 relay mount targeted to sell at $4500.

$4000 for a rotating/spinning/vibrating/pulsating/throbbing small glass on a little motor is tyranny.

If Red still decide to go with fixed lens on the Scarlet, be prepare to shell out lots of money for a 35mm adapter to go with it.

Aiden Cornwell
04-14-2008, 01:19 PM
no good narrative can be done without a shallow DOF and hooking up a third party 35mm adapter is a PITA.

I would pay up to $ 10k for a body only, 35mm sensor shooting 2k or even 1k with interchangeable lens mount and TC IN/OUT with min 2 CF card Modules.

Why not buy a Red One then. What you are asking for is Red one for about half the price

QManning
04-14-2008, 01:23 PM
Interchangeable lens.
XLR inputs.

And if it's not doable - can someone explain why? Is putting a Nikon mount onto a camera *that* expensive?

It can ship with the same lens they'd planned, but if it could be taken off and have another Nikon lens put on, then we're finally cooking. Any comments of 'well, if you want that, get the RedOne!' and so forth are ludicrious.

The Scarlet is attractive because of the resolution/price ratio. It's the HVX killer for sure. My production company was gearing up to purchase an HVX, but with this announcement, we're going with the Red Scarlet instead. So it's wonderful.

If I had to choose between interchangeable lenses and the XLR, I'd definitely choose the ability to swap lenses. I think you've already seen from this thread, this is the number one thing the customer wants. Since this camera's not even in manufacture yet, I hope Jim and the team listen to us.

We want this. And we'll pay extra for it if necessary. A stock lens just doesn't cut it - not in the way it handles depth of field, light, the circle of confusion, or even color. it's good to have for quick projects, but as most HD camera users will tell you, the use of something like the M2 or Brevis has taken hold for most cameras.

I'd hate to see the same thing happen to the Scarlet when it's not necessary. Why give money to another company? Why not just get a little extra from us, and make us all even happier?

ArthurG
04-14-2008, 01:29 PM
First point, interchangeable lens won't change the DOF. The size of the chip will not be bigger with nikon lenses. And if you want to put an adapter on the scarlet to use your Nikons it will be a smaller DOF but you will lose the interest of the 3K and the 2/3 sensor.
Scarlet should have interchangeable lenses I think because the 2.8 stop of its zoom is too big. When I need to put a 1.4 lens I think I should be abble to on a professional camera.

For the computer you should certainly have solutions for 4000$. But if you plan to buy FCS 2, add 1300€ (2000$?).

John Wee
04-14-2008, 01:30 PM
Because I ( as narrative indie filmmaker) was promised a revolution. I believed and joined the revolution and now we (narrative indie filmmaker) are being short changed. I am not asking for a RED ONE, heck, they can even give us dvcpro hd codec for all i care. Or a real revolution would be, partnership with Apple and being able to shoot the Scarlet in pro res 4:2:2.

I dont care much about audio, since we use a double system in all of our narrative shoots.



Why not buy a Red One then. What you are asking for is Red one for about half the price

Ignas K
04-14-2008, 01:32 PM
no good narrative can be done without a shallow DOF and hooking up a third party 35mm adapter is a PITA.

Narrative and DOF has nothing to do with each other.

it might look nice to play with shallow DOF and enhance your drama but real key for a "good narrative" is somewhere else.

I'll get scarlet only for the size and manual control. 3k and all the other goodies are just olive in my martini. small size changes the way I operate the camera - more crazy angles, more speed.

brandon thomas
04-14-2008, 01:32 PM
Interchangeable lens.
XLR inputs.

And if it's not doable - can someone explain why? Is putting a Nikon mount onto a camera *that* expensive?

It can ship with the same lens they'd planned, but if it could be taken off and have another Nikon lens put on, then we're finally cooking. Any comments of 'well, if you want that, get the RedOne!' and so forth are ludicrious.

The Scarlet is attractive because of the resolution/price ratio. It's the HVX killer for sure. My production company was gearing up to purchase an HVX, but with this announcement, we're going with the Red Scarlet instead. So it's wonderful.

If I had to choose between interchangeable lenses and the XLR, I'd definitely choose the ability to swap lenses. I think you've already seen from this thread, this is the number one thing the customer wants. Since this camera's not even in manufacture yet, I hope Jim and the team listen to us.

We want this. And we'll pay extra for it if necessary. A stock lens just doesn't cut it - not in the way it handles depth of field, light, the circle of confusion, or even color. it's good to have for quick projects, but as most HD camera users will tell you, the use of something like the M2 or Brevis has taken hold for most cameras.

I'd hate to see the same thing happen to the Scarlet when it's not necessary. Why give money to another company? Why not just get a little extra from us, and make us all even happier?

hey Q!

also.. after looking further... does it say anywhere that it is indeed a fixed lens.....?

oldphart
04-14-2008, 01:33 PM
no good narrative can be done without a shallow DOF and hooking up a third party 35mm adapter is a PITA.

Really? Seems to me I've seen a lot of good narratives with rather generous DOF. They obviously spent some effort getting the angles and background right, though.



I would pay up to $ 10k for a body only, 35mm sensor shooting 2k or even 1k with interchangeable lens mount and TC IN/OUT with min 2 CF card Modules.

So would I. I would even pay close to that for a S-16 sized 2k sensor in a RED-quality body with a nice changeable mount, but that is because a dollar is not what it used to be.

Joshua Provost
04-14-2008, 01:46 PM
Scarlet has nothing to do with 35mm... this is a Super16 Killer! Same DOF as Super16, 3k perfect acquisition format for a 2k or HD finish.

The lens may be fixed, but it's a RED lens, and we've seen what they can do with lenses. As long as the focal lengths are right, 8x can be all you need. Consider if it's 9mm-72mm (35mm equiv of 18mm-144mm), that's all you need for wide-angle to ECU as far as narrative filmmaking is concerned. I'm sure there will be wide-angle adaptors and tele adaptors for those that need something extra. This isn't a camcorder where OIS and 30x zoom are standard features.

To me this is the perfect balance between point-and-shoot camcorder and RAW workflow. A great camera for indie filmmakers and film schools, news gathering, run-and-gun, tight spaces, etc. I can't wait!

Gene Crucean
04-14-2008, 01:56 PM
As long as the focal lengths are right, 8x can be all you need. Consider if it's 9mm-72mm (35mm equiv of 18mm-144mm)

Not even close to cutting the mustard in my book. Would be nice to have as an option if it was fully auto though.

Johnbutler
04-14-2008, 02:08 PM
If it raises the price, please, no interchangeable lenses. It is now at the top of what I can afford. Creativity is not having the money to pay for a camera, but it is not uncreative to desire a quality medium for your work. However, if it's no extra trouble or even lowers the price, then by all means, go ahead. (But otherwise NO NO NO!) I like it the way it is and interchangeable lenses would make it harder to use automatically, and you need auto features (focus, primarily) for hand held, run and gun stuff. I say keep it the way it is. It's perfect for staying low priced and I don't want the price being raised.

paulgandersman
04-14-2008, 02:13 PM
First point, interchangeable lens won't change the DOF. The size of the chip will not be bigger with nikon lenses. And if you want to put an adapter on the scarlet to use your Nikons it will be a smaller DOF but you will lose the interest of the 3K and the 2/3 sensor.
Scarlet should have interchangeable lenses I think because the 2.8 stop of its zoom is too big. When I need to put a 1.4 lens I think I should be abble to on a professional camera.

For the computer you should certainly have solutions for 4000$. But if you plan to buy FCS 2, add 1300 (2000$?).

NO . WRONG . an interchangeable lens WILL adjust your DOF. Some lenses give you more shallow DOF than others. Thats how lenses work... The longer the lens.... well you know. or at least you should know. The chip and sensor does not govern how shallow the DOF is of an image. The type of lens and how you are using is does that. Interchangeable lenses are the end all be all answer to a completely controllable and customizable image.

paulgandersman
04-14-2008, 02:20 PM
If it raises the price, please, no interchangeable lenses. It is now at the top of what I can afford. Creativity is not having the money to pay for a camera, but it is not uncreative to desire a quality medium for your work. However, if it's no extra trouble or even lowers the price, then by all means, go ahead. (But otherwise NO NO NO!) I like it the way it is and interchangeable lenses would make it harder to use automatically, and you need auto features (focus, primarily) for hand held, run and gun stuff. I say keep it the way it is. It's perfect for staying low priced and I don't want the price being raised.

I disagree. You do not have to have automatic focus for a handheld shot. All you need is a decent camera op who knows his lenses. In fact, this camera can come with a default lens that HAS auto controls that can be removed for another lens easily. But saying that you have to have auto controls for all handheld is not true. I just shot a documentary that was nothing but handheld with a dvx and a spider brace and never once used auto-focus. Just practice and get to know your lens and distance from subject. You'll be surprised how quickly moving that focus ring becomes a natural, 2nd nature type of thing. And you get a much better result than auto-focus can ever provide.

oldphart
04-14-2008, 02:31 PM
...

The lens may be fixed, but it's a RED lens, and we've seen what they can do with lenses.
...


It is a damn ZOOM lens! Nobody ever made a prime-quality zoom lens, and nobody ever will. Zoom lenses are for situations where convenience is more important than quality.

The resolution of this camera is like running 25ASA B&W film in a S-16 camera, there is no reason to waste that on a mediocre lens.

Johnbutler
04-14-2008, 02:34 PM
I know it's not hard to manual focus, but the main reason I think fixed lens would be okay would be to keep the price down, which is important. Unless it doesn't raise the price, but still it's nice not to have to pay for extra lenses too.

paulgandersman
04-14-2008, 02:36 PM
i just don't understand how installing a little nikon mount ring is going to raise the price so much? its just some little grooved metal. the only reason for it not to be here is to create a larger gap between the Scarlet and the One, for marketing purposes.

Choptop
04-14-2008, 02:52 PM
hey Q!

also.. after looking further... does it say anywhere that it is indeed a fixed lens.....?

ding ding ding

Gabriel Winebrenner
04-14-2008, 03:22 PM
I am so happy with what Jim is doing to the film industry in general. That being said, I feel it would be a huge mistake to attach a fixed lens to the Scarlet. With the 5k Elite, and the already Red One, a 3k Scarlet with inter-changeable lenses still does not compete with either of the two higher end models. What it does, is give film students and starving artists like myself a chance to make real films with real tools, something to which the Japanese markets have been limiting us for decades. I would gladly pay $5,000 to $8,000 for a cine-lens with the scarlet being priced from $3,000 to $4,000. Compared to the Red One which I've heard costs about $35,000 to get up and running, this is a huge savings and is affordable. If any of you guys insist on having a fixed lens, I'd insist you buy an hvx-200 when the price goes down a thousand dollars. If however, you feel it important to have dof and be able to compete with the big boys in hollywood with something that actually compares to the images produced from film stock, I insist that you rally for inter-changeable lenses. I am confident that Jim will change this. I'm opening up a savings account now. Jim is a great man who does not limit himself or us and will answer our calls... Or at least I hope so.

Tom Lowe
04-14-2008, 03:25 PM
1. 35mm-size sensor

2. Regular lens mount for cinema and still lenses.

dieseljunkie
04-14-2008, 03:26 PM
Lens mount and interchangeable lenses. That's all.

ArthurG
04-14-2008, 03:47 PM
NO . WRONG . an interchangeable lens WILL adjust your DOF. Some lenses give you more shallow DOF than others. Thats how lenses work... The longer the lens.... well you know. or at least you should know. The chip and sensor does not govern how shallow the DOF is of an image. The type of lens and how you are using is does that. Interchangeable lenses are the end all be all answer to a completely controllable and customizable image.

thanks for the lesson. Now some optics :

H=F/(e x f)
PPN= (d x H) / (H + d)
DPN = (d x H)/(H - d)
DOF = DPN PPN

So the DOF varies when F or f varies. So if you put a 200mm at 1.4 you will have a very short DOF. I never said the contrary. But you will always be limited to the size of the sensor (e).

Chosei Funahara
04-14-2008, 03:47 PM
Even with a nikon or PL mount the apparent DOF is going to be about twice what you'd have on the RED one since it's a 2/3 sensor. To get 35mm dof we'd still have to use a 35mm DOF adapter like the Letus or Brevis. But yeah, having the option to use whatever glass we like would be nice.

I agree with him, but I don't want B4 mount lenses, neither P/S adapter or C-mount lenses.

Tinkleton
04-14-2008, 03:48 PM
:) you guys need to get a grip.

a new 2/3" sensor
1-120 fps
100 mb/sec raw to cf
3k :love:

and it's a dissapointment because it has a fixed zoom lens?
lol. get the #"% outta here.. :)

Mike Bozulich
04-14-2008, 03:49 PM
1. Interchangable lens!

2. full size sensor!!

3. 8 XLR ports!!!

4. $3000 is too much, how about $999?!!!!!!

Sheesh!

This camera is not meant to be a Red One competitor. Compare it to the EX-1, HMC-150, or the like. It blows them away! Especially for the price. C'mon people, if you want a full size sensor and interchangable lenses go for the Red One. That's what it's there for.

I'm personally thrilled with the design specs of Scarlet and plan to get one as soon as possible. I know at least 2 other people where I work who took one look at the specs and price and said "when can I order one?" Scarlet is a gift at the this price.

Chosei Funahara
04-14-2008, 03:50 PM
I mean that Fixed lens is fine with me.

Tom Lowe
04-14-2008, 03:59 PM
having a fixed lens and less-than-35mm-sized sensor means the camera is not very different from other prosumer cameras like the ex1. sure the sensor is a little bigger, and it's a little cheaper, but that is not a "game changing" difference. what would make scarlet special, IMHO, is being the ONLY prosumer camera with a full cine-sized sensor.

that's just my opinion.

Mike Smith
04-14-2008, 04:10 PM
having a fixed lens and less-than-35mm-sized sensor means the camera is not very different from other prosumer cameras like the ex1. sure the sensor is a little bigger, and it's a little cheaper, but that is not a "game changing" difference. what would make scarlet special, IMHO, is being the ONLY prosumer camera with a full cine-sized sensor.

that's just my opinion.
With all due respect Tom, it couldn't be pocket sized with a 35mm sensor. And it would need a 35mm sized lens to go with it making it even more bulky. You'd be talking close to the scale of Red One. I am amazed that Red got a 2/3" sensor in that little package.

proaudio4
04-14-2008, 04:10 PM
Very true. Although the Scarlet supports 3K image, the 2/3" sensor with a lens that only open up to f2.8 is not going to offer the tighter DOF many are looking to achieve.

You will still be hanging 35mm adapters off of the scarlet.
With no audio and additional requirements, it's going to negate it's portability.

Having said that, I'm sure it will produre nice looking footage!
For obvious reasons, I really did not think RED would offer this with a removeable lens. I was just hoping if the Scarlet had a fixed lens it would of been faster than f2.8, especially now that we know it's a 2/3" sensor.

We have not seen any image off of this camera. I can only imagine it will be nice, especially since RED has had time to work things out over the last year or more.

But for the price.. Wow, it sounds great. I wonder what's the real bottom line in $$ to have minimum setup?

Steven Kilzer
04-14-2008, 04:21 PM
While I understand the advantages of the Scarlet, 720p on my HVX and Letus Extreme is sharp enough that I've never had a client complain about it. Actually, they usually compliment me on how sharp the footage is.

3k looks great in the eyes of professionals but like others have said, the more breakthrough feature here would be interchangeable lenses. I know a few other 35mm adapter HVX users that were all hoping this camera would allow us to ditch our old set ups and move on to something more practical but until they put a lens mount on it, most of us won't bother.

Andrew Hewlett
04-14-2008, 04:29 PM
having a fixed lens and less-than-35mm-sized sensor means the camera is not very different from other prosumer cameras like the ex1. sure the sensor is a little bigger, and it's a little cheaper, but that is not a "game changing" difference. what would make scarlet special, IMHO, is being the ONLY prosumer camera with a full cine-sized sensor.

that's just my opinion.

Fixed lens is a little bit of a let down for me, but hopefully Red will come with the goods when it comes to the lens. As for the sensor, the 35mm sensor is in the Red One. We knew for a long time that this camera will not compete with Red One, which means its different in two places, sensor and lenses. This camera is VERY DIFFERENT from todays Prosumer equiment:
1. 2/3" 3K Sensor - Name a prosumer camera with that.
2. 2/3" 3K Sensor in a tiny modular hand held body - Name a prosumer camera with that.
3. RAW Recording under $10K - Name a prosumer camera with that.

The day I can say "I'd rather have that Sony/Panny/JVC camera than Scarlet" is the day it'll be like any other prosumer camera. I don't mean to be a Red Fan Freak, but what they are offering is great, especially if it's starting price is $3000 (which I still can't believe till Jennard publicly says so).

Mike Smith
04-14-2008, 04:31 PM
All you folks on here wanting interchangeable lenses, that's fine. But you'll need suitable lenses to go with it. You won't be able to use your Nikon lens etc. unless all you want are a bunch of telephoto lenses. Even your widest lens will be little better than a standard lens when applied to the 2/3" sensor. The only way you can have 35mm-like depth of field is with a 35mm sensor. If that wasn't so, you wouldn't ever need those lens adapters everyone is trying to avoid.

Having said that, 2/3'' will give a decent DOF - as good as an F23 and better than most anything else outside of the 35mm sensor cameras such as Red One.

ColinSmith
04-14-2008, 04:39 PM
I'm very happy with the 2/3" sensor..... bigger would be nicer, but for this camera I think it's the compromise to live with. 3K! dS16!! :-)

RedRaw.... well it had to be, didn't it :-)

I'm amazed at 120 and 180 fps options.... I did not expect more than 60.

I'm happy enough with the little Red zoom as an option, but have some worries about it getting wide enough for landscapes.

Hey, this is Red-land...... we accept the amazing and move straight onto how it could suit us better ;-)

Tinkleton
04-14-2008, 04:42 PM
Hey, this is Red-land...... we accept the amazing and move straight onto how it could suit us better ;-)

amen.

Tom Lowe
04-14-2008, 04:49 PM
With all due respect Tom, it couldn't be pocket sized with a 35mm sensor. And it would need a 35mm sized lens to go with it making it even more bulky. You'd be talking close to the scale of Red One. I am amazed that Red got a 2/3" sensor in that little package.

http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/157/scarletat7.jpg

Yeah, but I mean I would hardly call this thing "pocket sized"!

rocko, you make some good points. scarlet IS amazing. But I think we learned last time around with Red One that it doesn't hurt to toss in your 2 cents with suggestions for improvements. that's what's so great about jim and red. they actually listen.

Mike Smith
04-14-2008, 04:55 PM
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/157/scarletat7.jpg

Yeah, but I mean I would hardly call this thing "pocket sized"!

rocko, you make some good points. scarlet IS amazing. But I think we learned last time around with Red One that it doesn't hurt to toss in your 2 cents with suggestions for improvements. that's what's so great about jim and red. they actually listen.
Ha Ha! Right! So imagine if it had a 35mm sensor...

But you're also right about Jim and Red listening to us. That's the magic here.

Gene Crucean
04-14-2008, 05:14 PM
The only way you can have 35mm-like depth of field is with a 35mm sensor.

Yeah because my Nikon (dx format) has crappy DOF :umm:

Remember... the Red One's sensor isn't 36 x 24mm. It's 24.4 x 13.7

kmikami
04-14-2008, 05:25 PM
Zoom lenses are for situations where convenience is more important than quality.

Uh, I believe you could say the same thing about the very concept of a pocket camera! It's all about miniaturization, convenience, and price. If quality is your only concern, get the Epic.

kmikami
04-14-2008, 05:46 PM
having a fixed lens and less-than-35mm-sized sensor means the camera is not very different from other prosumer cameras like the ex1. sure the sensor is a little bigger, and it's a little cheaper, but that is not a "game changing" difference.

I don't really keep up with all of the latest models so I'm curious: where's the prosumer camera with full manual control that records a clean 1080p RAW image to solid state media for around $3k? That's all I really want. The 3k, the metal body, and high frame rates are all just icing on the cake. What's the closest competitor? The Sony XDCAM EX is what, $6.5k? The HVX doesn't even do full 1080p and it's $5k and records to expensive proprietary media. And both of those are way bigger than the proposed Scarlet design. Take one of those cameras to a public location and it's pretty obvious that you're not just a tourist.

Mike Smith
04-14-2008, 06:08 PM
Yeah because my Nikon (dx format) has crappy DOF :umm:

Remember... the Red One's sensor isn't 36 x 24mm. It's 24.4 x 13.7
Gene,

I'm not sure what you're saying here. But to clarify my point, when I say 35mm sensor, I'm referring to the size of a 35mm movie camera film frame.

Gene Crucean
04-14-2008, 06:26 PM
The HVX doesn't even do full 1080p and it's $5k and records to expensive proprietary media.

Umm... yes it does. 24p and 30p.

Gene Crucean
04-14-2008, 06:27 PM
Gene,

I'm not sure what you're saying here. But to clarify my point, when I say 35mm sensor, I'm referring to the size of a 35mm movie camera film frame.

But you referred to 35mm adapters. Most of which use a 36x24mm ground glass.

Mike Smith
04-14-2008, 06:42 PM
But you referred to 35mm adapters. Most of which use a 36x24mm ground glass.
Actually, I wasn't aware of that. But it does make sense since a lot of folks use 35mm film still camera lenses on these adapters.

My point was that you cannot expect as shallow a DOF as a 35mm movie camera (or Red One) with a 2/3" sensor. A lot of folks in this thread were talking about wanting to use their 35mm lenses directly on Scarlet and I was pointing out that that wouldn't work unless they didn't mind all their lenses being effectively telephoto or at best around standard (50mm equivalent on a stills camera) if using a wide angle lens.

Gene Crucean
04-14-2008, 06:50 PM
Actually, I wasn't aware of that. But it does make sense since a lot of folks use 35mm film still camera lenses on these adapters.

My point was that you cannot expect as shallow a DOF as a 35mm movie camera (or Red One) with a 2/3" sensor. A lot of folks in this thread were talking about wanting to use their 35mm lenses directly on Scarlet and I was pointing out that that wouldn't work unless they didn't mind all their lenses being effectively telephoto or at best around standard (50mm equivalent on a stills camera) if using a wide angle lens.

Yeah I gotcha.

My point (about my nikon) was that a full frame 35mm lens still produces beautiful dof and lens characteristics even with a DX sized sensor.

Dallas Zhen
04-14-2008, 06:58 PM
We all know it has a 2/3' sensor now.

How about Olympus 3/4' mount??

That way I can buy some Olympus 3/4' lens (17-35mm f2 & 35-100mm F2) and still produces beautiful DOF.

antiquaeuropa
04-14-2008, 07:01 PM
Well it would be easier to talk about what to keep. 120fps, 3k, Redcode Raw, Record to CF.

2/3" is just not going to cut it for me. That is something like 8.5mm wide, substantially less than even S16. The 2.8 aperture on the lens is totally inadequate. To have the same DoF as S35 with the same angle of view of a 35mm lens the aperture would have to be a whopping f.34!

I just don't see what you can do with Scarlet that you can't with the existing Japanese stuff. Yeah Scarlet is a little better, but it is still in that league and so your footage will be.

Red has "Digital Cinema" written on their own logo. In my book 2/3" fixed 2.8 does not qualify!

Tom Lowe
04-14-2008, 07:06 PM
I don't really keep up with all of the latest models so I'm curious: where's the prosumer camera with full manual control that records a clean 1080p RAW image to solid state media for around $3k? That's all I really want. The 3k, the metal body, and high frame rates are all just icing on the cake. What's the closest competitor? The Sony XDCAM EX is what, $6.5k? The HVX doesn't even do full 1080p and it's $5k and records to expensive proprietary media. And both of those are way bigger than the proposed Scarlet design. Take one of those cameras to a public location and it's pretty obvious that you're not just a tourist.

My main point is that putting a fixed lens in the scarlet keeps it in the same ballpark as other prosumer cameras, like Sony's EX1. Yes, it will be cheaper than $6K (EX1 might drop in price by the time Scarlet debuts), but by the time you get the LCD and all the accessories, probably not THAT much cheaper. Okay, Scarlet shoots 3K, but 3K is not a format, so your projects will finish at 1080p or 2K. So the resolutions are similar to the EX1 or EX3. So then the question becomes, how does Scarlet's dynamic range stack up against Sony's EX1 or EX3? That very much remains to be seen.

The only real benefit you are left with is RAW processing and higher framerates. On the downside, the EX3 will have interchangeable lenses.

In my humble opinion, the ONE real way Scarlet to could stand out from the crowd would be the ability to use existing 35mm cine glass, or at least interchangeable lenses. Hell, Sony's EX3 will have interchangeable lenses. And frankly, if I had to choose between interchangeable lenses or RAW, I'd choose the lenses. Everybody and their brother is slapping these lame 35mm adapters on every prosumer camera out there, so what would be "epic" is a camera that is 35mm from the start. Making the sensor a little bigger is not expensive, as far as I know. Isn't the opposite true?

The one huge glaring hole in the prosumer camera market is the missing 35mm-size sensor or an ability to use cine glass. In fact, the hole is so wide you could drive a truck through it.

Mike Smith
04-14-2008, 07:07 PM
Yeah I gotcha.

My point (about my nikon) was that a full frame 35mm lens still produces beautiful dof and lens characteristics even with a DX sized sensor.
Gene, I wouldn't dispute that for a moment. I also think that the DOF of the Scarlet will be shallower than most people might think. I was actually defending the smaller sensor, but also pointing out that you could not use the 35mm lenses without the telephoto problem.

kmikami
04-14-2008, 07:07 PM
Umm... yes it does. 24p and 30p.

I thought the HVX was just 1280x1080 rather than the full 1920x1280.

kmikami
04-14-2008, 07:09 PM
Okay, Scarlet shoots 3K, but 3K is not a format, so your projects will finish at 1080p or 2K. So the resolutions are similar to the EX1 or EX3. So then the question becomes, how does Scarlet's dynamic range stack up against Sony's EX1 or EX3? That very much remains to be seen.

I would wager that 3k scaled down to 2k is going to look way better than any of the competition's 1080p cameras. The noise should be much lower too.

brandon herman
04-14-2008, 07:19 PM
having a fixed lens and less-than-35mm-sized sensor means the camera is not very different from other prosumer cameras like the ex1. sure the sensor is a little bigger, and it's a little cheaper, but that is not a "game changing" difference. what would make scarlet special, IMHO, is being the ONLY prosumer camera with a full cine-sized sensor.

that's just my opinion.


It's all about a MUCH larger frame, shot in RAW.

The EX1 is a bulky, expensive, "baked in" image...(with a fixed lens).

And Scarlet records to CF cards.

Tom Lowe
04-14-2008, 07:28 PM
I would wager that 3k scaled down to 2k is going to look way better than any of the competition's 1080p cameras. The noise should be much lower too.

Perhaps. In general, yeah, I would agree. But dynamic range and low noise have not been RED's strong suits up until this point. In fact, the EX1 footage I have seen has been remarkably clean and displays impressive dynamic range and low noise. Again, it remains to be seen. No one can say for sure.

kmikami
04-14-2008, 07:51 PM
My point was that even if the noise performance isn't so hot at 3k, a lot of that noise will disappear once you scale the footage down to 1080p. Which is a luxury you don't have with other HD cameras. If you're already shooting at 1080p then the noise you see is the noise you get.

kmikami
04-14-2008, 07:54 PM
In fact, here's a test I would like to do. Find a really noisy 4k Red One image, crop it to 3k resolution, and scale it down to 1080. I haven't found a good image to test it on yet though.

John Caballero
04-14-2008, 08:44 PM
I would like the Scarlet to be a pinhole digital cinema camera. That way it won’t have that “awful” fixed lens stigma attached to it. It would also save me money on lenses and lens adapter for that matter too! It would also cost less, maybe like $999.99.
...Ah! and it would weight less too! And fit better in my pocket.....

antiquaeuropa
04-14-2008, 09:16 PM
My point was that even if the noise performance isn't so hot at 3k, a lot of that noise will disappear once you scale the footage down to 1080p. Which is a luxury you don't have with other HD cameras. If you're already shooting at 1080p then the noise you see is the noise you get.

The Ex-1 has 3 sensors. . . so the single CMOS better be bigger just to stay even. Anyway, we don't know what the true resolution or dynamic range will be, much less how it will compare with the competition future unreleased cameras. But we damn sure know that there will be some serious depth of field. At a 35mm (on S35) angle of view and distance to subject of 2m, we should have about 4.5m in focus. . . and hyperfocal at about 3m! Yeah!! :) Man I love that NBC football look in my favorite movies!

wardovision
04-14-2008, 09:35 PM
T But we damn sure know that there will be some serious depth of field. At a 35mm (on S35) angle of view and distance to subject of 2m, we should have about 4.5m in focus. . . and hyperfocal at about 3m! Yeah!! :) Man I love that NBC football look in my favorite movies!

and what makes you so sure of this. you continue to bash a camera you've yet to see a single image from. Your ASSumutions are almost as baseless as you expectations are high. Seriously, the only thing we knew beforehand was that Scralet isn't going to compete with the ONE in any shape or form yet you feel ripped off that they didn't completely replicate it for 1/10 the price.

BTW-this camera is absolutely perfect for a very large demographic and the only problem RED is going to have with it is keeping up with demand.

Tom Lowe
04-14-2008, 09:45 PM
and what makes you so sure of this. you continue to bash a camera you've yet to see a single image from. Your ASSumutions are almost as baseless as you expectations are high. Seriously, the only thing we knew beforehand was that Scralet isn't going to compete with the ONE in any shape or form yet you feel ripped off that they didn't completely replicate it for 1/10 the price.

BTW-this camera is absolutely perfect for a very large demographic and the only problem RED is going to have with it is keeping up with demand.

And what demographic would that be? People shooting skareboarders and wakeboarders at 120fps in the blazing sun? That's not "cinema"... if Scarlet is indeed even supposed to be a cinema camera.

BTW, what's with all the 1-post noobs coming here and dissing members of this forum?

John Wee
04-14-2008, 09:47 PM
BTW-this camera is absolutely perfect for a very large demographic and the only problem RED is going to have with it is keeping up with demand.

This camera is not meant to be for the masses. A casual shooter that has a less than most powerful MAC PRO system will have a HORRIBLE and TERRIBLE time working with 3k RAW. Not to mention, a clueless casual shooter will be terrified with the rolling shutter CMOS sensor phenomena.

But in order to avoid using the PITA 35mm adapter a lot of indie narrative filmmakers are willing to shoulder the two above mentioned problems. Too bad Scarlet will have a fixed lens.

Andrew Hewlett
04-14-2008, 09:48 PM
Well I'm tired of 35mm adapters (Sorry Brian Valente), so I'll probably be happy with a 2/3" 16mm-ish DOF. Yeah I wish it was 35mm sized, but hey, its $3000 and hopefully will perform like a $15K Panasonic HPX-500 (hopefully). I love the size (no Miller Arrow 55 to buy), love the 3K (except I'll need to get another Mac Pro and a RAID to handle the resolution), starting to warm up to the attached lens (hey the HVX has an attached lens and I don't mind that) and I LOVE the modularity of it.

Only questions, will it be standard 19mm rod support? Will it support Red Raid? Will supply get demolished by demand?

wardovision
04-14-2008, 09:51 PM
This camera is not meant to be for the masses. A casual shooter that has a less than most powerful MAC PRO system will have a HORRIBLE and TERRIBLE time working with 3k RAW. Not to mention, a clueless casual shooter will be terrified with the rolling shutter CMOS sensor phenomena.

But in order to avoid using the PITA 35mm adapter a lot of indie narrative filmmakers are willing to shoulder the two above mentioned problems. Too bad Scarlet will have a fixed lens.

who said anything about the masses? how about those who make and distribute action sports videos- surf, skate, snowboard, skiing, BMX, FMX, mountain biking, boating and 100 other sports. That market alone is enough to monopolize Scarlet sales. ( a market that Jim himself has great interest in)

remember Jim said this camera represents a whole new class of cameras

Andrew Hewlett
04-14-2008, 09:55 PM
And what demographic would that be? People shooting skareboarders and wakeboarders at 120fps in the blazing sun? That's not "cinema"... if Scarlet is indeed even supposed to be a cinema camera.

BTW, what's with all the 1-post noobs coming here and dissing members of this forum?

I'm not a Red Owner (yet), and I've been a practicing lurker for a while, but I'm sort of bugged by the noobie wave. Seems like over night the board lost it's professionalism. Hopefully after the hype dies down, it'll settle down.

Tom Lowe
04-14-2008, 09:57 PM
who said anything about the masses? how about those who make and distribute action sports videos- surf, skate, snowboard, skiing, BMX, FMX, mountain biking, boating and 100 other sports. That market alone is enough to monopolize Scarlet sales. ( a market that Jim himself has great interest in)

remember Jim said this camera represents a whole new class of cameras

yes, this is what scarlet would be good for. these types of action sports and maybe some ENG stuff.

wardovision
04-14-2008, 09:58 PM
T Not to mention, a clueless casual shooter will be terrified with the rolling shutter CMOS sensor phenomena.

you mean the same phenomena also associated with just about every single HD consumer cam currently available? They're going to have issues with that? you sure?

Tom Lowe
04-14-2008, 09:59 PM
I'm not a Red Owner (yet), and I've been a practicing lurker for a while, but I'm sort of bugged by the noobie wave. Seems like over night the board lost it's professionalism. Hopefully after the hype dies down, it'll settle down.

what bugs me is that you have people showing up with 2 or 3 posts and complaining that members who have been here for a long time are "crying" about new features. no, we're just letting or thoughts and 2 cents be known, and we don't need a freekin noobie out of left field coming in dissing and lecturing us.. haha. :bleh:

Many Moosh
04-14-2008, 09:59 PM
People stop asking for things you don't need. And trust me you don't need interchangable lenses. The truth if you an indie filmmaker, you can't afford to rent or buy good pro glass.

Your asking the red team to add a feature, that your willing to shell out more money for, which you can't afford to take advantage of, only never to use it. Come on folks Wake UP.

Tom Lowe
04-14-2008, 10:02 PM
People stop asking for things you don't need. And trust me you don't need interchangable lenses. The truth if you an indie filmmaker, you can't afford to rent or buy good pro glass.

Your asking the red team to add a feature, that your willing to shell out more money for, which you can't afford to take advantage of, only never to use it. Come on folks Wake UP.

Lol. Cased closed.

John Wee
04-14-2008, 10:08 PM
you mean the same phenomena also associated with just about every single HD consumer cam currently available? They're going to have issues with that? you sure?

For the exception of some of the Sonys(EX1, Ex3, V1u) , only 1 chip small handheld amateur cams come in CMOS sensor.

The respectable indie cam like the hpx170, Canon A1, G1, HVX200a, DVX100b, Sony Z1, XL-H1, JVC 200,XL-H1A, HMC 150, HMC 170, XL-H1S are all CCD cameras.

Good luck mounting a CMOS cam on a mountain bike going down a single track and hoping for a non wobbly footage. Good luck having people not take pictures with their camera flashes on the races/events.

MADMEDIA
04-14-2008, 10:26 PM
Two camps. Two cameras. Some of us need to run and gun - some need to paint with light. Just pump out a cine and eng version and many here will gladly pay. And yes please at least stereo if not four-channel audio. Is 24bit 96Khz not in line with a camera of this caliber?

Great potential for POV / In-Car and tight stunt shooting.
Keep it up.
-J

wardovision
04-14-2008, 10:27 PM
For the exception of some of the Sonys(EX1, Ex3, V1u) , only 1 chip small handheld amateur cams come in CMOS sensor.

The respectable indie cam like the hpx170, Canon A1, G1, HVX200a, DVX100b, Sony Z1, XL-H1, JVC 200,XL-H1A, HMC 150, HMC 170, XL-H1S are all CCD cameras.

Good luck mounting a CMOS cam on a mountain bike going down a single track and hoping for a non wobbly footage. Good luck having people not take pictures with their camera flashes on the races/events.

but weren't you talking about casual shooters being afraid of rolling shutter issues?

guess what but most casual shooters aren't shooting with a Z1, HVX, XL-H1 or any other "respectable indie cam".

...and flashes are real problem at 2 in the afternoon

I understand this isn't the perfect indie camera (cough ONE, cough ONE)nor do I believe tit was ever meant to be. That doesn't mean the demand for this camera isn't going to be unprecedented. The action sports market dwarfs the indie film market and there will be tens of thousands of teenaged to 30-somethings waiting for this to hit the selves

Isaac Brody
04-14-2008, 10:33 PM
Wow, nothing is good enough for people. We asked for 2k, they gave us 3k. All the other camera manufacturers come out with 1/3 chip HD cameras, and we're complaining about a 2/3 chip 3k three thousand dollar camera as not being good enough to shoot films on.

If Scarlet doesn't fit the bill buy or rent a Redone.

Adam Palomer
04-14-2008, 10:45 PM
Someone posted a link in another thread about the final features we can expect to see on Scarlet. One of these is a flip out LCD. That's even better than I thought when I first saw the prototype today. The fixed lens is not an issue for me. As far as controls, I'd really like to know how that cool joystick is going to work. Does it control all the manual functions? What about audio? Where is that going to fit? I think RED have a great prototype and I can't wait to see the final product and get one come 2009.

I currently use a Sony DCR-PC1000 for vacations and travel. It looks like the scarlet will be my next travel camera. Overkill, you say? Yeah I know. Isn't it cool though?

John Wee
04-14-2008, 10:57 PM
...and flashes are real problem at 2 in the afternoon

The action sports market dwarfs the indie film market and there will be tens of thousands of teenaged to 30-somethings waiting for this to hit the selves

Do you know what a single track is ?? hint, its not flat land with ample lighting. Good luck shooting snowboarding on CMOS, Good luck putting the cam on a vibrating boat.

Good luck on waiting 1 hour to digest 2 minute of partially exposed RAW footage. Too bad sports event shooting is not under controlled environment like on an indie narrative set. The last thing a CMOS camera is, an event shooting camera.

RED has always been a camera for narrative story telling. Its the core of the company and its product. REd is not made for ENG and certaintly not for Event Shooting (anything with strobes, flashes). Unless that new Mysterium X CMOS sensor is a global shutter sensor (which I hope it is going to be but highly unlikely.

2/3" simply will not give you that film shallow DOF look. If you are looking to get the Scarlet for narrative work, get use to a 35mm adapter. I heard the Letus is the reigning champ in this category and the new letus ultimate is going to cost around $4000 - $4500.

brandon herman
04-14-2008, 11:07 PM
Two camps. Two cameras. Some of us need to run and gun - some need to paint with light.

-J

i respect that attitude.....that's what the RED ONE is for. It's a steal at $17,500.


Do you think you can't paint with light as well at 2/3"? Well, maybe that's true a little bit. Then the $3000 camera isn't for you. You are free to use the other one.

PS: someone should tell David Fincher that ZODIAC wasn't very good because it was shot with a 2/3 sensor. (However, for a long while many professionals called it the most filmic of the digitally shot features....)

I don't mean to attack you personally; I'm just frustrated with reading the same complaints for the last 14 hours.

Wayne Morellini
04-14-2008, 11:08 PM
One thing that I have desired to add to my cameras designs, is a head mounted display over one eye.

The technology is even out there for retinal scanning.

This would be a high degree 3K screen, if possible.

It would be useful to be able to look around while filming and even handle other things while maintaining shot framing with greater ease. Get good low shots without getting low, and the same for awkward shots. In certain places users could even stick their cameras around a corner while under fire, and film what was happening.

I have other enhancements to such a design too.

Such a thing is desirable in the present price envelope.

Nik Manning
04-14-2008, 11:10 PM
Scarlet has nothing to do with 35mm... this is a Super16 Killer! Same DOF as Super16, 3k perfect acquisition format for a 2k or HD finish.

The lens may be fixed, but it's a RED lens, and we've seen what they can do with lenses. As long as the focal lengths are right, 8x can be all you need. Consider if it's 9mm-72mm (35mm equiv of 18mm-144mm), that's all you need for wide-angle to ECU as far as narrative filmmaking is concerned. I'm sure there will be wide-angle adaptors and tele adaptors for those that need something extra. This isn't a camcorder where OIS and 30x zoom are standard features.

To me this is the perfect balance between point-and-shoot camcorder and RAW workflow. A great camera for indie filmmakers and film schools, news gathering, run-and-gun, tight spaces, etc. I can't wait!

I feel the exact same way. I also feel if you have spent more that 8k on a camera then scarlet isn't targeting you. This is the prosumer camera killer. There are so many filmmakers that bought a hvx to make a movie now they all will buy a scarlet instead. If you own a Canon A1 up to a Canon XL H1 then you are in the scarlets market. In that market you cannot get a 2/3 inch camera. This camera will have sweet dof compared to those cameras. I understand some folks wanting a removable lens but that seems like a different camera. It seems like the RED ONE. Yes I am sure a 7K removable lens version would also do very well, but this version is for me baby!

Luis de la Cerda
04-14-2008, 11:18 PM
What bothers me is that scarlet has the potential to be an amazing unique camera, except for the fixed glass thing. All else I can live with. I don't care if DOF is huge, I don't care if she has a rolling shutter. What I think makes scarlet unique is the form factor, but what good is a small camera if I can't decide what my fov should be. It's the same thing with hdv pocket cams. Sure, I can stick an hv10 bewteen a dashboard and the steering wheel in a car, but what good is it if the fov is narrower than a XL-H1 suction mounted to the windshield with a wide lens? Having lens choices won't make scarlet my a-cam. That's a given. But it will allow for creative shots I'd be unable to pull off even with a Red One. I want both and I want scarlet to be the camera it has the potential to be.

Btw... 2/3" is not such a great thing when the sensor has 3K crammed into it and the lens is limited to 2.8 OUCH! You'll need lotsa light.

ArthurG
04-14-2008, 11:21 PM
One thing is affraiding me. Red One have a sensibility at ISO 200. So the Scarlet should have the same. If you add the 2.8 zoom this camera couldn't run on lowlight at full open. And the lenses performances at full open aren't the best.
Useless to speak about the 35mm adapter light lost.

Wayne Morellini
04-14-2008, 11:41 PM
Hmm. 2.8 is low, but it maybe because of some superior design. I have not followed the one, but did it not get exceptional picture under low light when tests, or something like that? With some of the technologies I know of, the sensor can make up for lack of light, one could even film through very narrow apertures. Still, a replaceable lens would be good.

35mm DOF adaptors, this can be done optically with very little light loss.

Altogether, I suspect it might not be much an issue, except for DOF (where some might prefer 1 to 0.75f).

wardovision
04-15-2008, 12:29 AM
Do you know what a single track is ?? hint, its not flat land with ample lighting. Good luck shooting snowboarding on CMOS, Good luck putting the cam on a vibrating boat.

Good luck on waiting 1 hour to digest 2 minute of partially exposed RAW footage. Too bad sports event shooting is not under controlled environment like on an indie narrative set. The last thing a CMOS camera is, an event shooting camera.

RED has always been a camera for narrative story telling. Its the core of the company and its product. REd is not made for ENG and certaintly not for Event Shooting (anything with strobes, flashes). Unless that new Mysterium X CMOS sensor is a global shutter sensor (which I hope it is going to be but highly unlikely.

2/3" simply will not give you that film shallow DOF look. If you are looking to get the Scarlet for narrative work, get use to a 35mm adapter. I heard the Letus is the reigning champ in this category and the new letus ultimate is going to cost around $4000 - $4500.

If I can take a HV20 down a trail (yes, single track) or swim in 20ft surf with acceptable results why is Scarlet going to be any different?
where did i say anything about events? contests suck no matter the sport and events are an extremely small part of action sports shooting. narrow depth of field? the 2/3" chip should be better than the HVX and EX-1 when I need it. My sponsors don't send me around the world to exotic locations to blur out the background. Don't need to leave So. Cal for that.

again with the flashes? Not too many of them at Pipeline on a good day.
In fact, much lesser cams are producing excellent images in every 1 of your scenarios and seem to find their way into just about every genre of sports video out there. This is a sport shooter's dream cam.

el_stupido
04-15-2008, 12:59 AM
I tend to agree with everyone saying they should adopt a Canon XL1 interchangeable/New Sony Interchangeable product model. Seems a waste for the 3K to be stuck with the one lens no matter how good it is.

Word.

El Stupido

QManning
04-15-2008, 01:01 AM
People stop asking for things you don't need. And trust me you don't need interchangable lenses. The truth if you an indie filmmaker, you can't afford to rent or buy good pro glass.

Your asking the red team to add a feature, that your willing to shell out more money for, which you can't afford to take advantage of, only never to use it. Come on folks Wake UP.

Who says we can't afford it? Who says we can't afford to rent lenses?

Do you know where we get our money? Do you know what projects we do? Do you know how much we get paid for those projects? Do you know how much we make in supplemental income that could assist in renting or purchasing lenses?

No. You don't. I'm astounded at what some of you think constitutes independent filmmaking and what the needs of an indie filmmaker are.

My needs aren't the same as your needs aren't the same as his needs.

This camera is fantastic. But it would be a wet dream unmatched if the lenses could be changed. It's just that simple.

Afterall, the money we'd save by owning the Scarlet and not having to rent a more expensive camera could immediately be translated into renting desired lenses.

I will say that the rolling shutter is a little scary as someone who's used to shooting with the HVX & DVX cameras. That's something I'm on the fence about, and it's silly to poo-poo someone's concerns. They're valid. You can't say it's not an issue, when shoot-outs have shown that there are issues with a rolling shutter.

I'm glad I looked into this thread again, because that wasn't something I initially picked up on when reading the specs.

Has there been any information on a Focus-Assist similar to what the HVX-200 has to help supplement the low-quality of onboard LCDs? I know that focusing on the HVX sans Focus Assist can be a crap-shoot. I can only imagine the difficulty when dealing with 3k.

brandon thomas
04-15-2008, 09:44 AM
i'm sure the lcd on scarlet will be at least 720p. so... much better than what you're used to with the panasonics..

John Caballero
04-15-2008, 10:06 AM
Yeah. Why be stuck with a fixed lens that ONLY gives you wide angle, normal, telephoto and zoom capabilities? you can't do much with a lens like that, right? Like no, what you really need is many separate lenses like a wide angle, normal, telephoto, and maybe one with zoom capabilities. It would be imposible to work without interchangeable lenses. It might actually be unethical to do something like that.

Akcelik
04-15-2008, 10:11 AM
interchangeability... because no RED should be without one!

Bryan Bishop
04-15-2008, 10:15 AM
John, I'm really liking your style this morning.

QManning
04-15-2008, 10:28 AM
i'm sure the lcd on scarlet will be at least 720p. so... much better than what you're used to with the panasonics..

720p is still nowhere NEAR 3k.

So, again - is there a plan to put a focusAssist on this thing?

Otherwise, you're relying on Auto-Focus, which is a joke as we all know, or connecting to an external, which complete removes all of the benefit of the camera.

See how EVERY DECISION impacts EVERY OTHER THING? Crazy huh ;)

Ameer Azari
04-15-2008, 10:42 AM
I tend to agree with everyone saying they should adopt a Canon XL1 interchangeable/New Sony Interchangeable product model. Seems a waste for the 3K to be stuck with the one lens no matter how good it is.

Word.

El Stupido

EXACTLY!!!!!!

ufsix
04-15-2008, 04:15 PM
Just returned from Las Vegas, first post ever. First time to the NAB, really enjoyed it, seemed to me far more relaxed than the IBC.

A lot can happen in the next 12 months, and that's what I would like to see happen to SCARLET in this time:

1. Focus & Zoom ring, if you already have a protruding lens anyway
2. XLR connections
3. Vastly improved ergonomics

Looking forward to a significant re-design.

diskojerk
04-15-2008, 07:34 PM
Stanley Kubrik is rolling in his grave.

brandon thomas
04-15-2008, 07:52 PM
720p is still nowhere NEAR 3k.

So, again - is there a plan to put a focusAssist on this thing?

Otherwise, you're relying on Auto-Focus, which is a joke as we all know, or connecting to an external, which complete removes all of the benefit of the camera.

See how EVERY DECISION impacts EVERY OTHER THING? Crazy huh ;)

let's just say i'd happily settle for a 720p preview with or without focus assist.. i'm also preparing myself, wallet included, to shell out for a letus extreme in addition to the scarlet with how things stand currently... and i don't mind.

Greg Syverson
04-15-2008, 08:19 PM
$3,000.00 2/3 inch CCD HD

This blows me away

My only complaint is I do not have one for this summer.

killfilm
04-15-2008, 08:22 PM
happy with the scarlet and greed is no good, so lets improve on this miracle.

-better shoulder mount
-a longer zoom lens

good enough for me.

brandon thomas
04-15-2008, 09:15 PM
$3,000.00 2/3 inch CCD HD

This blows me away

My only complaint is I do not have one for this summer.


i think it's a CMOS chip.. not ccd.. am i wrong?

brandon thomas
04-15-2008, 09:21 PM
i'm not trying to be anal and correct you.. i just had always assumed it's CMOS and a CCD would be very interesting...

combatentropy
04-15-2008, 09:35 PM
i think it's a CMOS chip.. not ccd.. am i wrong?

CMOS, according to Ted Schilowitz: http://youtube.com/watch?v=QkoHTjx8siM

wardovision
04-16-2008, 08:51 AM
another thought to ponder for those demanding interchangeable lenses...TIME

New models aren't designed overnight and the switch from a fixed lens to a mount would require a complete redesign. If we're going to have to wait a year for Scarlet as currently speced then how long do you suppose a new camera designed from scratch is going to take. I think some people here are under the assumption that RED didn't start developing Scarlet until a few months ago but it's more likely been in development since day 1.

Tom Lowe
11-14-2008, 10:36 PM
hehe...

Roberto Lequeux
11-15-2008, 12:31 AM
99% perfect! :love:

I feel that the Master qualities that should differentiate Epic from us are:

_ RedCode 225 vs. 42
_ Higher framerates at higher resolutions vs. only 60fps in 2k
_ Ramping vs. no ramping at all
_ The ability to go for broke with the 645

Then we should get ONE LAST thing: Timelapse

Not a real big deal! Anyone with me?

Jim Perry, Jr.
11-15-2008, 02:04 AM
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=324548#post324548
I love what we have here... but i would enable the 2/3" Scarlets
to change frame sizes and fps within its specs:

3k 1-120 fps
2k 1-150 fps (or whatever the math will allow)
1080p 1-180 fps (again whatever the math allows as max fps)

That would be awesome! Isn't this technically possible with
the less complex electronic engine since Scarlet will process
smaller frame sizes at higher frame rate? :greedy:

Radoslav Karapetkov
11-15-2008, 03:29 AM
Ramping for the small Scarlet, babeee! :)

Roberto Lequeux
11-15-2008, 07:17 AM
It actually would be quite sweet, but the only difference would be Red Code. It probably would not be enough to boost Epic sales to fund the whole thing. Red Code 36 is amazing enough for most.

Though how am I supposed to know what they need to break even.

It is just so hard to expect anything else after so much was recently unveiled to be coming our way as it is already.

brian leahy
11-15-2008, 12:40 PM
my desired changes see linked image

http://img440.imageshack.us/my.php?image=rednewspecstt7.jpg

Roberto Lequeux
11-15-2008, 04:13 PM
My desired changes around here: :innocent:

Seriously though... can RedCode 225 vs. 42 be enough? Then add an additional ~40fps overcranking, and ramping. And the possibility to go for broke with the 645...

Are you afraid that we'll steal all your work because of resolution, lens mount and overcranking?!

Isn't it supposed to be all about the user, about the work, the skills... and not the gear?

Roberto Lequeux
11-15-2008, 04:45 PM
Oh! Crap! My bad!!!
Forget about that!!! I just saw what you did with the specs!

Bad news for you is that there is no way that the fixed lens FF35 scarlet would be possible at that size or price, never unless they figure out a way to bend light and make pro lenses out of plastic. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news... but the ens would have to be huge and it would be expensive... I like the concept, but don't get too greedy! We were already given the ability to walk on water, don't ask to be able to drive semi trucks over the Atlantic for cheaper freight. :watsup:

Tom Lowe
11-15-2008, 04:46 PM
Ramping for the small Scarlet, babeee! :)

Just shoot the whole thing overcranked and do your ramping in post. this aint film, baby.

Roberto Lequeux
11-15-2008, 04:52 PM
Just shoot the whole thing overcranked and do your ramping in post. this aint film, baby.

hehehe... this is true... Twixtor does an amazing job... I am sure there will be a good post path for this and RR42... just shoot with a short shutter to cut back almost all the motion blur and shoot as high as possible... you can then create any sort of ramp you want, bring it to 24fps and make it shoot up even further than 120fps, easily to about 200fps, and with great results too...

Tom Lowe
11-15-2008, 04:54 PM
I think some NLEs like Premiere Pro CS4 even handle ramping now. Obviously, AE does it marvelously.

Roberto Lequeux
11-15-2008, 04:55 PM
So Tom, link me to your first post after seeing the brochure, I want to read your reaction. :)

Radoslav Karapetkov
11-15-2008, 04:56 PM
Just shoot the whole thing overcranked and do your ramping in post. this aint film, baby.


Does it look as good as real ramping, I've never tried that.

Roberto Lequeux
11-15-2008, 05:02 PM
Does it look as good as real ramping, I've never tried that.

For excellent results you need no motion blur in the original footage and you can't push it too far... however Twixtor which is a plug in for AE does a marvelous job... if you pushed clean 120 footage to 180 you would be hard pressed to notice it is cranked in post. The key is to give it as much info as possible... so the 120fps is a god-send.

Radoslav Karapetkov
11-15-2008, 05:05 PM
No, I was asking about ramping, not overcranking.

Tom Lowe
11-15-2008, 05:09 PM
I don't know if the old "shoot the highest frame rate you need then ramp in post" is exactly as good as in-camera ramping. Maybe one of the pros here can discuss that.

I guess exposure time might play into it. But I would think for most ramping you could just shoot at the highest rate you want/need for the slo-mo part of the ramp, and then speeding up the other parts (ramping up) would be fairly straightforward in AE or PP CS4, etc. I've played around with 60p overcranked footage in AE using its ramping, and it works great.

Radoslav Karapetkov
11-15-2008, 05:11 PM
Tom, do you mean the Time Remapping thing in AE?

Actually it's in PPro too.

Matthias Martin
11-15-2008, 05:18 PM
I do recognize that the 2/3" scarlet has blown the tiny-sensor-competition out of the water. I mean, who want's to buy an EX1 or a HVX now? Or an F23 for that matter...
It is just that: I want to get rid of the fuzzy image and light losses of my 35mm adapter. And 1080p target resolution is enough for a whole bunch of years to come. The movie theaters here have projectors that are only 1080p, and it looks totally ok. I even once produced some ad for screening on 35mm film - produced it as 1280x720 and it looked OK on the 25m screen.
I realize that red has skew handled, but why can Nikon make a camera with S35 sized chip for $1k? I would gladly pay $5k for a scarlet that made 2k at 50fps from an S35 sensor. Even the Arri D20 is 2k, and no one is deriding it for being just 2k, or at least not very loudly. RED is about modularity. That modularity is of limited usefulness if resolutions are maxed out even now? Give me a measly 2k now and I'll upgrade later when there's an actual demand for 4k, 6k, 8k. I mean that would have been a great way to differentiate the scarlet from the RED ONE, scarlet: 2k, R1: 4k.

5k on the S35 will make my quad core MacPro seem really old. And $7k will require me to have a solid business plan. But maybe that's a good thing...
You know, all these folks shooting with DoF adapters are now totally used to FF35 DoF and going back to 2/3" is really hard.
Now I don't think that changes in the sensor program are likely to happen still, and that's what would be needed to accommodate my desired changes. And I don't even know if making the S35 sensor only 2k would make its cost decrease significantly.

Well, so much for 1st post. Sorry if this is coming across somewhat negative.
It's not that I am not totally hyped about the redvolution, because I am. Because now, if I figure out a way to make a buck from making films, I know that there is a camera that will totally deliver for a reasonable amount of money.

Kris Denton
11-15-2008, 07:56 PM
Will the 2/3" Scarlet shoot 1080P as the REDONE is going to do?

It should.

I think this will make it real competition to the new Varicams.

Tom Lowe
11-15-2008, 08:50 PM
Tom, do you mean the Time Remapping thing in AE?

Actually it's in PPro too.

Hehe, do you already have CS4? :) :whistling:

Yeah. That feature works great. You just have to shoot high FPS to acquire an entire sequence, and then you can essentially speed up parts of it - for that ramping effect. Again, I seem to remember that there might be some advantages to ramping in camera, but I'm not an expert on this. I know that when you're shooting film, you obviously don't want to just overcrank everything, because it's expensive. But there might be other reasons, like shutter time, that would cause people to want to ramp in camera.

silly-pictures, keep in mind that when Scarlet was announced, it was 2/3 3K with a fixed lens, period. Many of us here begged Jim to make a 35mm sensor, and we said we were willing to pay more for it. So he has answered our prayers. I'm sorry that he did not make one EXACTLY like you need for the price you can pay, but he is offering a hell of a lot of options.

35mm 2K makes no sense at all, because you will essentially be left with an image that is about 720 quality - which is of little use to most of us. Yes, Genesis and other pro cameras are 2K or 1080p, but most of them hugely oversample the image to achieve that 1080 or 2K. A Bayer-pattern 2K camera will not result in a clean 1080p or 2K.

Roberto Lequeux
11-15-2008, 09:16 PM
I don't know if the old "shoot the highest frame rate you need then ramp in post" is exactly as good as in-camera ramping. Maybe one of the pros here can discuss that.

I guess exposure time might play into it. But I would think for most ramping you could just shoot at the highest rate you want/need for the slo-mo part of the ramp, and then speeding up the other parts (ramping up) would be fairly straightforward in AE or PP CS4, etc. I've played around with 60p overcranked footage in AE using its ramping, and it works great.

The whole idea is that the more frames you have the more information Twixtor will have closest to the point in time for which a frame needs to be created. The higher the frame rate the smaller the spaces get in between the frames that you captured. I am not so sure how Twixtor works, but someone told me that two of the things it does is to look at each pixel in the frame before and after closest to the point in time for which it is creating a frame for... and it also looks at several frames before and after to analyze the motion in the frame... it is some real intricate algorithm stuff... so what you want is clean pixels, meaning without motion blur.. real pixels... and to get as much info as possible for Twixtor to be able to refer to.



No, I was asking about ramping, not overcranking.

Twixtor allows you to make up your ramps in post.. you tell it what you want to have and give it what you captured, and it creates the frames. Overcranking is only used to give as much info to Twixtor as possible for it to have the highest probability of creating accurate frames.


I was told that with clean 60fps you can get decent 120fps, so perhaps 80fps out of 60fps would be clean enough for most people.




So as an example you could shoot something at 120fps, then get it into Twixtor and turn it into 24fps at first, then create a ramp that lasts X seconds and goes from 24fps to 200fps, then hold the 200fps for X seconds and then create an other ramp that lasts X seconds and goes back down from 200fps to 24fps... all from the 120fps captured footage.

Roberto Lequeux
11-15-2008, 09:22 PM
Hehe, do you already have CS4? :) :whistling:

Yeah. That feature works great. You just have to shoot high FPS to acquire an entire sequence, and then you can essentially speed up parts of it - for that ramping effect. Again, I seem to remember that there might be some advantages to ramping in camera, but I'm not an expert on this. I know that when you're shooting film, you obviously don't want to just overcrank everything, because it's expensive. But there might be other reasons, like shutter time, that would cause people to want to ramp in camera

Exactly... that is what I am saying.


Ramping in-camera is excellent because it is real frames captured at the exact points in time needed for the ramp... so it is sharp as could be. The only "problem" would be that you need to get it perfect on location because tweaking it will be nearly impossible or at least a royal pain.. especially because you would not have a dense timeline filled with frames... you would only have 24fps making the gaps as big as they could be so re-mapping would be done with little information.

However raping in camera is kind cause it is real. Ohhh... the beauty of a perfect ramp... just... magic. :love:

Tom Lowe
11-15-2008, 09:27 PM
USlatin, I think we are kind of mis-communicating. karapetkov was not asking about turning 120fps into 200fps.... that's a separate issue. he was talking about straight-forward ramping, which does require the creation of interpolated frames to create a slo-mo effect -- the slo-mo part was already captured by the camera. all you need is a ramping program to speed up parts of the 120fps video, for example, to make them appear to run closer to real-time speed.

Edit: okay, i just saw your last post and it seems like we are on the same page now. :) Where are you from, USlatin?

Roberto Lequeux
11-15-2008, 09:35 PM
Yea, it is all the same... I was just trying to explain it using an example that also referred to the limits of the feature which would be on the top end as undercranking is always easier for these programs.

Am I not making any sense at all that you ask me where I am from? lol... I am not feeling that great right now.. tired and hungry, plus I've been breathing in smoke from the fire in the north end of the valley, about 10 miles from here...lol

I was born in Argentina, Buenos Aires, moved to Boca Raton 12+ years ago and here about 3 years ago. So I am half and half, basically. :)

Tom Lowe
11-15-2008, 10:00 PM
Am I not making any sense at all that you ask me where I am from? lol... I am not feeling that great right now.. tired and hungry, plus I've been breathing in smoke from the fire in the north end of the valley, about 10 miles from here...lol

LOL, sorry. We have so many people from around the world that I sometimes just assume it's a language thing... hehe. No worries.

Roberto Lequeux
11-16-2008, 12:34 AM
No unfortunately, it is more of a personal thing... lol

:clown2:

brainburst
11-17-2008, 12:39 PM
I don't get the choice of a 2/3 sensor at all. A 3k sensor in a 35mm form factor is technologically EASIER to achieve than trying to increase pixel density. Furthermore since the cell size would be larger it would also yield a much better s/n ratio and better dynamic range. All the other electronics and a non fixed lens mount as an option would make a great entry level pro camera.

Julio Quintana
11-17-2008, 12:50 PM
Bigger sensors cost more money. That's why you have to pay more for a full frame DSLR.

brainburst
11-17-2008, 01:28 PM
Bigger sensors at the same pixel density might cost more money.
At lower pixel densities they don't. They cost consumers more money because they are in more expensive cameras. And they don't cost that much more! i.e. a $900 camera vs a $400 camera. Would you pay $500 more for a 35mm size sensor?
Bear in mind that the smaller sensor is going to cost you more because you'll need a better lens!

Zach Swena
11-17-2008, 01:42 PM
Would it be possible for Jim to make a 3k s35 camera for around $3k? I understand that a bigger physical size of sensor might be more expensive to manufacture, but making it at lower resolution might also reduce the cost.

I see a huge advantage to be able to upgrade the body and use the same lenses. I agree that the 2/3" sensor has it's place, but it would be hugely useful if you could start out with a 3k resolution, which is plenty for todays standard requirements, and have the option to upgrade the body without getting a whole new lens set.
I see this as a flaw in the lineup that was announced. It was stated that you would be able to upgrade by just upgrading the "brains" and not the whole system. This is only possible for the higher end cameras leaving out the pro-sumer level and leaving a big gap between $2,500 and $7000. Sure I know that Red will come out with higher resolutions later and probably offer upgrades for the 2/3" as well as the *35 versions but those who need upgrades or additions before this happens would be up a creek.

For example if someone starting out got a 3k 2/3" camera than added a second S35 camera as primary and the 3k camera became secondary than the lenses would not be usable between both cameras. A whole new set of lenses would need to be purchased.

I the announcement last Thursday totally blew my mind and I am very grateful that Jim made all the changes that he did. However I noticed that he didn't remove the features and specs are subject to change, in fact count on it statement. I take that to mean that he still might be willing to make some changes.
I would like to see options from the ground up on both lens options. I can see someone paying up to $3500 for a 3k S35. I don't see any reason that making a bigger sensor at the same resolution would cost more than $1000 more than a 2/3" sensor.
I would see this option as really making competition RED in the face. That's what you want right Jim?

Any comments Jim?

Roberto Lequeux
11-17-2008, 02:33 PM
I think it is just to be able to offer 2/3" sensors... some people prefer them because it makes DoF deeper and still allows for decent shallow DoF when needed... the fact that it is 3K is probably because they don't want to go lower than that so that all their cameras offer true debayered 2k output. just my guess.

Stuart English
11-17-2008, 02:43 PM
3K on 2/3" is a sweet spot for controllable DOF and excellent image quality across a very large number of applications.

Zach Swena
11-17-2008, 05:03 PM
3K on 2/3" is a sweet spot for controllable DOF and excellent image quality across a very large number of applications.


That is why 2/3" is good. This still doesn't address the lens issue. When one goes with this size though they will probably end up with thousands of $$$ in glass that won't be useful with an s35 or FF35 upgrade when they want to add a more powerful camera. All the mini reds will limit the res on a **35 when used together.

This means that when upgrading from 2/3" model to a **35 model a whole new set of lenses will need to be purchased. This is not the "upgraded simply by purchasing a new brain" talked about in the release document. Starting with a 3k 35mm option will be a lot less expensive than having to push out a higher res 2/3" model soon after the release. For me these seem to be the only two options to make that "upgraded simply by purchasing a new brain" marketing phrase come true.

You guys have an awesome operation going here!! I hope you don't let your marketing ploys not match your delivery of product.

brainburst
11-17-2008, 05:13 PM
3K on 2/3" is a sweet spot for controllable DOF and excellent image quality across a very large number of applications.

Yes but there's a sweeter spot for people who want a larger sized sensor but don't need more than 3k of data. They are willing to pay for it. If Red is a customer focused company they will do some research, not just dictate what should be good enough.

Nick Ambrose
11-17-2008, 06:15 PM
Starting with a 3k 35mm option will be a lot less expensive than having to push out a higher res 2/3" model soon after the release. For me these seem to be the only two options to make that "upgraded simply by purchasing a new brain" marketing phrase come true.



So Jim should sell you a camera (at probably a loss to RED financially) so you don't have to spend money on 2 sets of lenses ... hmmm, seems a touch 1-sided possibly ?

EDIT: I think it's pretty obvious that if you buy a brain with a bigger sensor, then you need to also have lenses appropriate for that sensor, no ?

Matthias Martin
11-17-2008, 07:06 PM
silly-pictures, keep in mind that when Scarlet was announced, it was 2/3 3K with a fixed lens, period. Many of here begged Jim to make a 35mm sensor, and we said we were willing to pay more for it. So he has answered our prayers. I'm sorry that he did not make one EXACTLY like you need for the price you can pay, but he is offering a hell of a lot of options.

35mm 2K makes no sense at all, because you will essentially be left with an image that is about 720 quality - which is of little use to most of us. Yes, Genesis and other pro cameras are 2K or 1080p, but most of them hugely oversample the image to achieve that 1080 or 2K. A Bayer-pattern 2K camera will not result in a clean 1080p or 2K.

I think you are very right. And yes, RED did the absolute most they could do with regard to listening to their customers. Regarding 2k not producing crisp 1080p - i just realized that my lowly HV20 has a native 2k sensor in it...(although being used in cropped mode for motion), so much for 2k producing crisp 1080p - I stand corrected.

BTW, today I saw the RED ONE being operated by Soderbergh on the frontpage of a Swiss Newspaper :
http://www.20min.ch/unterhaltung/kino/story/23103158
that's the online version of that article
Sorry, that was fairly OT.

Radoslav Karapetkov
11-17-2008, 07:10 PM
S35mm 3K Scarlet. :devil:

Roberto Lequeux
11-17-2008, 07:13 PM
Yes but there's a sweeter spot for people who want a larger sized sensor but don't need more than 3k of data. They are willing to pay for it. If Red is a customer focused company they will do some research, not just dictate what should be good enough.

The last thing that Red is doing is dictating anything... the lineup is everyone's dreams that were posted here coming true all at once. Remember that they just created their boards, programs running in the cameras and sensors not too long ago. Look at what they are offering now with R1, every build comes out with more features... ever increasing versatility is their MO with R1...

Look at what they did just ONE day after releasing their specs when they saw so many asking for higher fps on bigger sensor Scarlets... immediately they released new specs with higher fps using a windowed sensor.

With time they will develop more technology, and they are numero uno for not holding back technology for monetary gains... expect the most out of this company, not others.

Now if what you want is to have recording settings so that you can only record a particular resolution and have the down conversion done in-camera, you are talking about a lot more processing power needed... a new board would have to handle this... while I completely agree that it would be a sweet feature and probably the very last frontier for Red to have the most versatile camera ever concieved you have to understand that this would up the cost... perhaps the best way to deliver this is a new module.

However, you can already use proxies that will use only half the resolution, 1/4 the resolution and edit those without the need for downconversion... look at the Mythbusters video on Red.com

However if we could shoot full frame on the S35, or using the FF35 and shoot in windowed S35 mode, PLUS be able to select 2K recording... then that would be the mother @#$ing holy grail.

Always thought about that... but it would require an other board to do the downconversion... so I thin we might see a module coming out eventually that allows you to by-pass the CF slots on the camera and use new CF slots, or plug in your HDD or SSD to this new box... that will probably look like one of those add ons that look like they are part of the camera like in those gorgeous renders in the brochure showing the camera with a matte box and all the other bells and whistles...

brainburst
11-17-2008, 08:08 PM
I don't like the 2/3 sensor because of the tiny cell size, mediocre DOF and the requirements entailed for higher quality glass. It doesn't have to be full 35mm sized. It just needs to have larger sized photoreceptors. A larger sensor that ends up at something closer to APS-C size that would accept cost effective glass, even with cropping, would be great!.
This absolutely does not entail anymore R&D
It can use existing technology. The same exact silicon. With higher yields!
All other camera parts could be exactly the same (no separate 2/3" camera body) Really! This is a cost effective winner and the only reason for Red not to pursue it is if they think it would eat into sales of higher priced cameras. They would save so much money by having one fab for all their sensors and one body for all of their Brains!

Zach Swena
11-17-2008, 08:28 PM
It just needs to take 3k, use 35mm glass, have a minimum frame crop and be priced in the entry level range.

Since $2.5k probably won't happen than probably somewhere under $3.5k. The increased sales from the pricing will offset the decreased margins. $4k would be ok but on the high end.

Roberto Lequeux
11-17-2008, 11:19 PM
Brain, APS-C is just about what S35 and IMO you will likely never get your wish of something in between 2/3 and S35... you would end up using S35 glass like you said so why not go up to a S35 sensor.

I consider the 2/3 a gift from Red, though they'll probably make their money selling the other Red accessories to the 2/3 owners.

Maybe consider starting with a more limited package for a S35 Scarlet and building up from there.

Maybe you guys need to be reminded of how much something like an HVX-200a costs and what it provides... 1/3", 5 stops, 4:2:2, and 1080p from a sensor with lower than 1080 photosites, a non-fixed aperture lens and it costs $5,500... take out the cost of an equivalent lens and see how much more you are already getting from Red... just saying'

David Swan
11-18-2008, 06:41 AM
Brain, APS-C is just about what S35 and IMO you will likely never get your wish of something in between 2/3 and S35... you would end up using S35 glass like you said so why not go up to a S35 sensor.

I consider the 2/3 a gift from Red, though they'll probably make their money selling the other Red accessories to the 2/3 owners.

Maybe consider starting with a more limited package for a S35 Scarlet and building up from there.

Maybe you guys need to be reminded of how much something like an HVX-200a costs and what it provides... 1/3", 5 stops, 4:2:2, and 1080p from a sensor with lower than 1080 photosites, a non-fixed aperture lens and it costs $5,500... take out the cost of an equivalent lens and see how much more you are already getting from Red... just saying'

I know the footage from my HVX looks pretty good, and the others in my film-club are amazed by it, even with its limitations. Remember the HVX provided the best bang-per-buck when it came out.
Now Red aren't just upping the bar, they've kicked it into orbit, even with the lowest Scarlet, which is why I want one, better res, vastly better D/R, just got to hold onto my perspectives, and not wish for what I can't afford.
Sorry to ramble.
David

brainburst
11-18-2008, 08:04 AM
Maybe you guys need to be reminded of how much something like an HVX-200a costs and what it provides... 1/3", 5 stops, 4:2:2, and 1080p from a sensor with lower than 1080 photosites, a non-fixed aperture lens and it costs $5,500... take out the cost of an equivalent lens and see how much more you are already getting from Red... just saying'

Are comparing the cost of an entire camcorder to the price of a sensor module? That is ridiculous!
While we are comparing, the cell size of the HVX200 is approximately 4.8 microns. How noisy is that camera? The EX-1 cell size works out to be like 3.4 microns. How much noisier will a bayer sensor with only 3.2 micron cells be?
And the point that keeps being missed: Unless you put great glass on a 2/3 inch scarlet it will not achieve it's full resolution. Period! I guarantee if you only put middling glass with this sensor it won't look any better than an EX-1. The nice thing about the RED1 is even mediocre glass, (like the red zoom) was OK, if not great. With the 2/3 sensor and it's tiny cell size (40% smaller than the RED1) a lens like the Red zoom would not cut it. Don't you get it?
I'll say this again. I am not looking for a full 35mm sensor. Not even that close. Just something that uses the same cell size as the 4k and higher cameras. It would end up with like a .85" scanning diagonal size vs the .5" actual scanning diagonal size of a 2/3 sensor. Maybe a 1.2" sensor

I want something that:

will not require me to buy expensive glass.
will have a more film like DOF
will have a low S/N ratio

Roberto Lequeux
11-18-2008, 06:06 PM
I did forget about sound I guess!

But there is a lot more to noise-less sensors than size. We'll have to wait and see what Misterium-X does.. however it should be like build 16 quality or better even noise wise...even for Scarlet. It was never spelled out that it would have less noise than 2k R1 mode, but it was just about.

Now about the better glass requirement due to smaller photosensors... now I think I get your point, but chill out dude... sorry that I didn't understand what you were saying but I am not so sure you were making yourself clear either. Though maybe it was just me not getting what you were saying. Either way... relax. I understand now.

I think you are forgetting about the fixed lens scarlet though... that glass is supposed to be amazing... from the way they keep talking about it it will certainly meet your requirements and likely exceed them... they talk about it as if it were of the same quality of the new zoom. And you can expect the price to be about that of a new HVX or lower... so the only thing will be audio... we'll have to wait and see how much that will run for if the brains don't have any inputs... however the fixed lens scarlet is also supposed to have at least two channels of 48/16.

It sounds to me like you might be a candidate for the fixed Scarlet... and if you can't get it here you still shouldn't be calling Red a dictator as if they took something away from you when all they do is listen and deliver more than any other company.

I hope you can find something that meets your requirements at a good pricepoint... but if you don't then just get an EX1 right now and try to avoid fast pans... but if 1/2" isn't enough then what do you expect anyone to tell you other that what I already tried to point out..?

Who knows... maybe I am grossly mistaken and Red decides to come out with a bigger sensor... some new size or a slightly more obscure size that is in between...

good luck mate

brainburst
11-18-2008, 06:45 PM
Hey what happened to all of the posts between 10:15 and 8 pm today? Are we being censored?

brainburst
11-18-2008, 06:54 PM
Also the format I am proposing IS NOT obscure by any measure:

="http://www.four-thirds.org/en/products/lense.html

Download the PDF to really get a sense of just how many options already exist for a larger sensor!

="http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22278&page=6"]http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22278&page=6"]http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22278&page=6"]http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22278&page=6