Stop Sulking

[David Wesemann]

Seriously, sorry to start a new thread on this one, but I think the point deserves it.

I can't believe someone called scarlet a disappointment after this announcement. If you're eager to get 35mm dof, shoot on red, you're missing the whole point of this great little camera. 2/3 is still the biggest chip size ever to be found on any camera in this price segment, let alone size. Anyway, who is going to pull the focus for you, if this thing had 35mm dof, because I'd quite like to meet the guy. Don't you remember how amazed people were at the depth of field Orson Welle's images had. He struggled like hell to get these, because there were no smaller film sizes than 35mm. But it seems people are always trying to do stuff their tools can't do, while looking at the limitations rather than the possibilities. Some weeks ago I wrote that either way, someone was going to be disappointed by this camera. But today I'm surprised I was right, to be honest. Here we are with a camera that both aspiring or documentary filmmakers and RED one owners can put to good use. I thought this was impossible. And it shoots three-*******-K.

As for Jim and the rest. I'm amazed. You did it again. You shook this market to the bone, when it desperately needed it.

all the best, keep it up

David

Once again Spaceman Jim beats all odds to save the day!!!

[EHYO!!]

AMEN on every point.

i cannot wait to see the development of this product.

i think its sort of a case of... people wanting (i was going to say red one but yea...) EPIC money for peanuts.

this is something to be expected from the genuine openly receptive way that the Red people seem to do things. people voicing opinions on things are essentially helping Red with ideas and potential customer "wants" i think this is amazing. remember the products we have seen today are not strictly finals. things can change. i personally think the scarlet is unbelievable if the predicted price range is reasonably accurate.

this is an industry changing product. if you won't buy the camera then at least appreciate the fact that it will make whatever you choose over it (whatever the rivals can shake together and sell at a loss purely to retain market numbers) will have been influenced by what we have seen today.

my first post but i have been reading closely for MONTHS. i have learned a lot from you guys.

[Gabriel Winebrenner]

I'll stop sulking when Jim announces that I can attach a cinema inter-changeable lens to the Scarlet body. And I'll be able to start making films and setting out for NYC that much sooner. As for the Red One, I'd be saving up for a year and a half with 3 jobs due to child support and living expenses. The Scarlet and a Cine-lens would only take me half a year to come up with. Wouldn't you be happy if you could use your Red One lenses with the Scarlet? If I was looking for a cheap fix, I'd go with the HVX200, but I know what I want to do with my life and it is film. Say I was content with my prior 12 years in the AV industry as a tech and a stagehand, the Japanese models would be fine and will still be fine for most documentaries, weddings and political seminars. But RED is to replace this limiting market that actually ends up handicapping "could be David Lynch's out there." I believe RED can revolutionize the caste system which separates the haves and the have-nots, and socialize quality film making once and for all.

[Craig Ryan]

Yeah but if they did add a mount, then the price would only go up. The more you want added to scarlet, the more expensive it will become, theres no question about it. If you really need interchangeable 35mm cine lenses, then you could RENT a Red One, if money is the issue.

[red i wanabe]

I agree 2/3 chip is fine you need that for eng and run and gun. I just hoped that you could take of the measly 8x lens and put on different glass. Or a RED 35mm adaptor or a letus, for us folks who want DOF. Or at least make the lens fully manual, but not having intercangability limits it's uses.

I have a dream of making an HD/SDI multicam flypack based around the scralets cams. Image I could have about 8 cameras shooting a concert on 3K. That would look top notch and cost next to nothing. But I would need long lens for the close ups cams, and wide andle for the handhelds.

[Mike Bozulich]

I have to chime in here as well. I can't believe the amount of whining that's going on right now. I kinda predicted this way back when the hype started. Without any sort of info people begin to have unrealistic expectations as to what a product will be. For evidence of this, hang out on a Mac forum for a bit just before Mac World. Rampant speculation! Then what happens upon product release? Disappointment. If I have any criticism of Red at this point (and it's a very small critcism) it is that there should have been a bit more transparency Re: Scarlet. I remember posting early on requesting a bit more info so that people would have more realistic expectations. But alas it did not happen and now there are many people out there that are disappointed. So be it.

I believe this camera is as much of a revolution as the Red One was. Price vs performance NOTHING touches it. Nothing. No other camera in its class has RAW output, 120 fps, 3K res, 2/3rds size sensor. Not even close. Even cameras costing twice as much. Yet somehow its a "disappointment". I do not agree. I think this camera is a gift to the low-budget and student filmmakers out there. And for that I say to Jim and the Red team, thank you so very much....

....Now where do I reserve mine? :biggrin:

[Jonathan Wheeler]

I'll stop sulking when Jim announces that I can attach a cinema inter-changeable lens to the Scarlet body. And I'll be able to start making films and setting out for NYC that much sooner. As for the Red One, I'd be saving up for a year and a half with 3 jobs due to child support and living expenses. The Scarlet and a Cine-lens would only take me half a year to come up with. Wouldn't you be happy if you could use your Red One lenses with the Scarlet? If I was looking for a cheap fix, I'd go with the HVX200, but I know what I want to do with my life and it is film. Say I was content with my prior 12 years in the AV industry as a tech and a stagehand, the Japanese models would be fine and will still be fine for most documentaries, weddings and political seminars. But RED is to replace this limiting market that actually ends up handicapping "could be David Lynch's out there." I believe RED can revolutionize the caste system which separates the haves and the have-nots, and socialize quality film making once and for all.

That's interesting that you mention David Lynch, who eschewed film and shot his last movie on VIDEO, on purpose. It's not about what camera you have. You can tell a moving story with anything, if the story is worth telling.

I can't wait to get my hands on this camera. Sure we would look bad ass with a red one, but do you need it? Do you have the crew to utilize it? I will be able to do tons of filming on the sly with Scarlet that Icould never get away with something as big as a One. I'm pumped. Thank you Jim and co.

[antiquaeuropa]

2/3" is just not going to cut it for an artistic movie. I for one don't care about making commercial to promote crap that nobody needs.

Anyway, it is a great value proposition and will probably sell quite well. However, I doubt that any great movies will be made on it (at least that I would call great). Might be good to learn some things on.

Should be a fabulous camera for documentaries and news gathering. Maybe that is the professional market that Red is going for. However, there I would prefer longer record times. . . we will see what Scarlet delivers. Anyway, I think that the existing choices in the prosumer range provide enough to create a power documentary or news footage, and most importantly that ship today.

I would have loved to see S16 here.

2.8 is not that competitive. The HV20 has 1.9.

Also I am surprised that Red announced it now, giving Sony a full year to compete with it. I suspect that most would pay a premium for an equivalent camera from a long established company that is not so ever-changing and volatile.

Given the fact that it is not even coming out until 2009, I think that everybody on Reduser who is honest with himself will choose to sulk for at least a little while.

[Gabriel Winebrenner]

I don't understand why some of you guys are content with the fixed lens. Obviously, the knowledge of Red, has guided you to enlightenment that you need much more than what the contemporary pro-sumer offers when it comes to film. Shelling out $5,000 for a Red lens is nothing if your serious about making movies. Isn't the HPX500 like $11,500? The Scarlet with interchangeability will still cost far less than this, will be far superior as it shoots in 3k, ect..., ect... I think there are a lot of cheap guys on here that want quality for nothing by going for the fixed lens. How are you going to get skilled at interesting and artistic shot composing using a prosumer fixed toy lens? The Scarlet has awesome specs. It's as though some of you want this Olympic champion to be blinded. The lens is by far the most important component of a camera. It's the brain's/camera body's perception and sight in comparison to the elements that surround it. With an inter-changeable lens, you will learn the craft as opposed to being a pundant with an XL2, hdv, or other piece of trash, that only attempts to make a "film look," yet doesn't make the mark. I don't wish to downsize myself or my talents. Jim will come through, even for the economically hardened peeps like myself. P.S., to the comment about why not renting a Red One: maybe due to them being 600-900 dollars a day...? If I could own a Red One, I would never rent it out. It is like an artist's brush. You must take good care of your tools.

[Gabriel Winebrenner]

That's interesting that you mention David Lynch, who eschewed film and shot his last movie on VIDEO, on purpose. It's not about what camera you have. You can tell a moving story with anything, if the story is worth telling.

I can't wait to get my hands on this camera. Sure we would look bad ass with a red one, but do you need it? Do you have the crew to utilize it? I will be able to do tons of filming on the sly with Scarlet that Icould never get away with something as big as a One. I'm pumped. Thank you Jim and co.

As far as I knew, the RED ONE, RED ELITE, as well as SCARLET, are not 35mm film cameras but are 3k, 4k and 5k video, that competes, if not surpasses the strengths and weaknesses of film. So I guess, me and Lynch, are alike in ways. And I would think that Lynch would want the Scarlet to be as accessible to his visions as he was to his camera.

[Zack CC]

I have to chime in here as well. I can't believe the amount of whining that's going on right now. I kinda predicted this way back when the hype started. Without any sort of info people begin to have unrealistic expectations as to what a product will be. For evidence of this, hang out on a Mac forum for a bit just before Mac World. Rampant speculation! Then what happens upon product release? Disappointment. If I have any criticism of Red at this point (and it's a very small critcism) it is that there should have been a bit more transparency Re: Scarlet. I remember posting early on requesting a bit more info so that people would have more realistic expectations. But alas it did not happen and now there are many people out there that are disappointed. So be it.

I believe this camera is as much of a revolution as the Red One was. Price vs performance NOTHING touches it. Nothing. No other camera in its class has RAW output, 120 fps, 3K res, 2/3rds size sensor. Not even close. Even cameras costing twice as much. Yet somehow its a "disappointment". I do not agree. I think this camera is a gift to the low-budget and student filmmakers out there. And for that I say to Jim and the Red team, thank you so very much....

....Now where do I reserve mine? :biggrin:

Man... I don't know about whining... the only way I'll be disappointed is if I don't get to beta the camera...:tongue: knowing that everybody and their mother wants to already, I'm trying to figure out my pitch... but still. OK so I won't get 35mm DOF, that wasn't going to happen due to sheer physical space limitations.... however, if the speculation is true, and Scarlet comes in at under $3K then this could be my jumping in point! My friends and I have all been scrambling to come up with a plan to make $50Kfor a RED ONE.. it wasnt going to happen. Finally, with Scarlet we will be able to join in the REDvolution!

Thanks in advance Mr. Jannard!

[Tom Lowe]

It is not "whining" to give our opinion about not wanting fixed lenses. That's just an opinion. It's what "discussion" forums are made for.

Do you think any (even semi-) serious still photographer shoots on point-and-click comsumer cameras with fixed lenses? No.

[Shawn Bannon]

what about Terry Richardson? he has had a pretty successful career with point and shoot cameras.

[Shawn Nelson]

I was in the first group into the booth this morning, just got on here...people are complaining about scarlet??? Holy shit, this camera is twice as good and a third the price of my best expectations.

[Vincent Rice]

The moaning in these forums is truly breathtaking. Buy it or don't buy it, but for God's sake $3K? That's extraordinary value and if it means a fixed lens then that's fine. RED are going to sell shitloads of these.

[Mike Bozulich]

I don't understand why some of you guys are content with the fixed lens. Obviously, the knowledge of Red, has guided you to enlightenment that you need much more than what the contemporary pro-sumer offers when it comes to film. Shelling out $5,000 for a Red lens is nothing if your serious about making movies. Isn't the HPX500 like $11,500? The Scarlet with interchangeability will still cost far less than this, will be far superior as it shoots in 3k, ect..., ect... I think there are a lot of cheap guys on here that want quality for nothing by going for the fixed lens. How are you going to get skilled at interesting and artistic shot composing using a prosumer fixed toy lens? The Scarlet has awesome specs. It's as though some of you want this Olympic champion to be blinded. The lens is by far the most important component of a camera. It's the brain's/camera body's perception and sight in comparison to the elements that surround it. With an inter-changeable lens, you will learn the craft as opposed to being a pundant with an XL2, hdv, or other piece of trash, that only attempts to make a "film look," yet doesn't make the mark. I don't wish to downsize myself or my talents. Jim will come through, even for the economically hardened peeps like myself. P.S., to the comment about why not renting a Red One: maybe due to them being 600-900 dollars a day...? If I could own a Red One, I would never rent it out. It is like an artist's brush. You must take good care of your tools.

Thanks for the lecture SuperGrafx. Yeah, color me a cheap ass. Sorry if I can't afford $3000 camera AND $1000+ for lenses AND $500+ tripod, plus a computer capable of handing & editing 3K footage, lights, and so forth. Yup, I'm forever doomed to make crap - me, and my fixed lens Scarlet. Thanks for educating me. I always though art was about the artist, not about which brush he paints with.

Somehow I think that Scarlet in the hands of a talented filmmaker (Peter Jackson? Steven Soderberg?) could produce a GREAT film, fixed lens and all.

[Gabriel Winebrenner]

The moaning in these forums is truly breathtaking. Buy it or don't buy it, but for God's sake $3K? That's extraordinary value and if it means a fixed lens then that's fine. RED are going to sell shitloads of these.

RED is not Panasonic or Sony. It should not be their intent to sell "shit-loads." They will sell loads of Scarlet, just as many if not more, with the mount and option for interchangeability of lenses. I mean, to the RED ONE owners on this forum: wasn't it RED's accessibility in the RED One what made you side with the company and devout your loyalty when many others in the industry were calling Jim's ambitions a scam? Many of you have the money due to working in productions to afford the Red One since it costs a lot less than a 150,000 dollar camera, ect..., ect..., and may want this Scarlet to be a mass produced feature so that RED can become like Sony and Panasonic and create beta builds with new features that never have any bugs in them, ect... Scarlet will sell more with the lens attachment options, since people, even the poorer people who may or may not have as much money as you, want to be part of the game as well. With interchangeable lens options, the Scarlet will be the most seeked out camera for film schools and colleges as well as independents in the whole wide world. Please let the world enjoy some of the fruits of Red's success as well. It feels as though some may be scared of the competition in thinking that with the Scarlet with added options may counter their selfish aims.

[Gabriel Winebrenner]

Thanks for the lecture SuperGrafx. Yeah, color me a cheap ass. Sorry if I can't afford $3000 camera AND $1000+ for lenses AND $500+ tripod, plus a computer capable of handing & editing 3K footage, lights, and so forth. Yup, I'm forever doomed to make crap - me, and my fixed lens Scarlet. Thanks for educating me. I always though art was about the artist, not about which brush he paints with.

Somehow I think that Scarlet in the hands of a talented filmmaker (Peter Jackson? Steven Soderberg?) could produce a GREAT film, fixed lens and all.

You are not cheap, and I'm not trying to insult you in any way. It saddens me that my Quicksilver G4 733 mhz, even if I would replace the processor to a 2.0 ghz and graphics card to a flashed 256mb ati, might not cut it for editing 3k footage, with or without a fixed lens. But as much as I would like to use the same computer that runs Maya, CS3, toon boom studio, ect.., ok, I must update it at some point. However the camera is my goal. I must first obtain this, then think about what I need next. Examples: Good lighting, sound, dolly, steadicam, ect... Rome was not built in a day. The brush is as important as the paints. I prefer oils, since I feel they are much more colorful. I was also not calling you or anyone else a "cheap ass." Look at me, I owe $60,000 for an education I never finished, pay child support every month, had to leave San Diego and surfing behind let alone the lovely hippie girls of Ocean Beach and a cool job at Rhino Staging and Events to be closer to my children. Now I'm 31, and as I get older, I know I only have now or never to make my dreams as a film-maker a reality. Being in DC, I've settled to relocate to NYC, due to the mass amount of similar starving artists who wish to succeed and also to be closer to my offspring. But I know I need the proper tools aka brushes and oils. Games are over, although I look very forward to GTAIV. It is hard to be patient and save for an expensive camera that may not be quite the Red One, but still executes the task at hand, but it is the only option.. The current prosumer cameras do not do the job, and that's why Red came into existence, at least I think so. I am sure you are very talented and may realize that a 3k hvx isn't what aspiring film-makers need, and if that is not one's intention, then why not support Panasonic or Sony? They seem to be doing a great job at making cameras that are not film worthy.

[antiquaeuropa]

I don't understand why some of you guys are content with the fixed lens. Obviously, the knowledge of Red, has guided you to enlightenment that you need much more than what the contemporary pro-sumer offers when it comes to film. Shelling out $5,000 for a Red lens is nothing if your serious about making movies. Isn't the HPX500 like $11,500? The Scarlet with interchangeability will still cost far less than this, will be far superior as it shoots in 3k, ect..., ect... I think there are a lot of cheap guys on here that want quality for nothing by going for the fixed lens. How are you going to get skilled at interesting and artistic shot composing using a prosumer fixed toy lens? The Scarlet has awesome specs. It's as though some of you want this Olympic champion to be blinded. The lens is by far the most important component of a camera. It's the brain's/camera body's perception and sight in comparison to the elements that surround it. With an inter-changeable lens, you will learn the craft as opposed to being a pundant with an XL2, hdv, or other piece of trash, that only attempts to make a "film look," yet doesn't make the mark. I don't wish to downsize myself or my talents. Jim will come through, even for the economically hardened peeps like myself. P.S., to the comment about why not renting a Red One: maybe due to them being 600-900 dollars a day...? If I could own a Red One, I would never rent it out. It is like an artist's brush. You must take good care of your tools.

Supergrafx is really totally right about the lens. I won't go so far as to say that no fix lens could work, but here the fixed lens is just 2.8! Get out your depth of field calculator. Unless you have a talking heads picture what can you do? You can't be a student filmmaker and really learn the craft with this camera. Sorry guys, I had hoped for better too.

[Vince Arvidson]

I'm split on the fixed lens, on one hand it would be great to be able to change the lenses to suit the shot, but on the other I'm glad to have a camera that is so compact. For dramatic work there's the red one and epic, for the corporate and doc work that I also do, having a small camera is important.

A fixed lens doesn't mean that the quality of the lens is bad, although 2.8 is slowwww.

[antiquaeuropa]

RED is not Panasonic or Sony. It should not be their intent to sell "shit-loads." They will sell loads of Scarlet, just as many if not more, with the mount and option for interchangeability of lenses.

Right again. I hate that Red is shifting its focus into this dumbed down area of video. I thought that they pioneering "Digital Cinema." Of course, it will be a great value for the money, and very likely it will sell well. But what will Red focus on? Well now it is not clear. Instead of getting their camera that "renders obsolesce obsolete" totally right they are off in prosumer la-la land. Sure they can do it better than the others if they want, but why? Is the area even worth much time or talent going into it? Sony does it for money. Why is Red doing it? What sort of moving stuff are you guys planning on shooting with Scarlet? I would be surprised if someone makes a decent feature film with it.

[David Dennis]

Supergrafx, Scarlet is a mid-priced camera at best, something a person with an average income could reasonably aspire to.

If you think Scarlet is an expensive camera that you can barely afford, you should be very happy it was designed as it was, because interchangeable lenses probably would have brought the price up to at least $5k. Add $2,000 worth of lenses and you're looking at a lot of money for someone in your position.

If you can afford more, you might consider that in a year or so Jim will have trade-in RED ONEs that he might wind up selling at an advantageous price to people like you. As you know, he has more than a few customers for which money means next to nothing, and who will immediately upgrade to EPIC five minutes after Jim starts selling it.

People have made wonderful, gripping films using MiniDV equipment, with lenses hardwired to the camera. We love to make our films beautiful, so of course we upgrade to the latest and greatest, but I'm not sure if audiences care that much.

I plan to buy Scarlet, assuming it winds up at or close to its rumored price point. I'll bet you could create great stuff with it if you got over the idea, often seen on this forum, that equipment dictates results. It can make your films look better, but in the final analysis your plot and actors are what really matters. If you get them right people will forgive you if you use a 1CCD MiniDV camera.

D

[Luis de la Cerda]

With 3 Megapixels in such a small sensor AND a 2.8 lens, scarlet will have to go back in the bag many hours before my "crappy" HDV cameras begin to feel light starved. Doesn't sound too promising, I'm sorry.
I also smell a lens range way too telephoto at it's widest range to be able to cover 8x. I'd much prefer a 2x or 1.5x really wide lens, but then again, since the lens will be fixed, I'll probably won't get what I need, neither stock nor as an option. (And I've never EVER seen a good wide adapter, meaning rectilinear, sharp, with little or no CA and good flare control) What good is a really small camera that you can stick in a very small space if you FOV will be narrower than if you had used a full size camera with a really wide lens? :(
None of those 2 aspects sounds "profesional" to me.

[Tom Lowe]

The moaning in these forums is truly breathtaking. Buy it or don't buy it, but for God's sake $3K? That's extraordinary value and if it means a fixed lens then that's fine. RED are going to sell shitloads of these.

That's not how it works at this forum. "Buy it or don't buy it" is what Sony and other huge corporations give us. Here, Red actually listens to our suggestions, concerns, and input, and then, if they agree, they make changes to the cameras.

[Buck Forester]

RED is not Panasonic or Sony. It should not be their intent to sell "shit-loads."

I think Jim has the say what their "intent" should or should not be. Some of us are excited about this Scarlet, so you might think it shouldn't be RED's intent to make such a product, and I'm glad Jim thinks it should be. That's all. It's all good. The more profitable RED is as a company, the better we are for it too.

[Gabriel Winebrenner]

Supergrafx, Scarlet is a mid-priced camera at best, something a person with an average income could reasonably aspire to.

If you think Scarlet is an expensive camera that you can barely afford, you should be very happy it was designed as it was, because interchangeable lenses probably would have brought the price up to at least $5k. Add $2,000 worth of lenses and you're looking at a lot of money for someone in your position.

If you can afford more, you might consider that in a year or so Jim will have trade-in RED ONEs that he might wind up selling at an advantageous price to people like you. As you know, he has more than a few customers for which money means next to nothing, and who will immediately upgrade to EPIC five minutes after Jim starts selling it.

People have made wonderful, gripping films using MiniDV equipment, with lenses hardwired to the camera. We love to make our films beautiful, so of course we upgrade to the latest and greatest, but I'm not sure if audiences care that much.

I plan to buy Scarlet, assuming it winds up at or close to its rumored price point. I'll bet you could create great stuff with it if you got over the idea, often seen on this forum, that equipment dictates results. It can make your films look better, but in the final analysis your plot and actors are what really matters. If you get them right people will forgive you if you use a 1CCD MiniDV camera.

D

Jim is offering the full amount of the Red One's $17,500 base price for a trade in for an Elite. As nice as this is to previous Red One owners, and this is nice, very nicer, actually nicer than I could ever be, used Red OneZ will still be in high demand at that point, so the body's price, I could imagine could be 14k to 15k, and that is used. The 5k difference, is not too much a deterrent to make the Red One unwanted and Red knows this. They might take a 2 grand loss in selling an Elite, but in no way will they be loosing money, as they are selling Elites and gaining new customers with used Red One bodies that will need the extra $15,000 in extra gear to just get started. Not to mention, that many of these used models will be coming from rental houses. Rental gear gets banged up. I should know, I neglected a lot of rental stuff myself. It was all insured and corporate so there was less value in something that you earned for yourself from slave labor.

I'll pay 5k for a Scarlet with the given improvements. Hell, I'll pay 8 thousand if the improvements are up to par with 35mm as in the Red One model. Beats $17,500. I agree that 3k resolution is as good as I need right now. Man, I could settle for 2k with the options parallel with the Red One's performance. But I know, resolution alone does not make a film. I am looking for Red One's little sister, not his inbred mistake. But like I said, if I wanted to pay 3k for a camera that didn't perform to cinematic expectations, I would go Japanese. I have nothing against the Japanese. Hell, my first wife was Japanese. I liked her so much that I married her when I was 19 so she could stay in the country and please me. But that's the past. I am a totally new person now. I prefer quality as much in a camera as in an individual.

[antiquaeuropa]

People have made wonderful, gripping films using MiniDV equipment, with lenses hardwired to the camera.
D

Give me your top 3, please.

[Bing Bailey]

to be honest while I went a little batty about the whole epic thing. I have no complaints about scarlet. guys red just gave you a camera better than f23 with a lens for 3k. no doubt the lens will be great

[antiquaeuropa]

I am looking for Red One's little sister, not his inbred mistake.

Haha! :biggrin: Me too!

Why do you guys think that your final products with Scarlet are going to be so much better than the Japanese alternatives selling today?

[kmikami]

Give me your top 3, please.

Dancer in the Dark
Festen
Bamboozled
The Idiots
The Cruise
Julian Donkey Boy
etc.

[kmikami]

Why do you guys think that your final products with Scarlet are going to be so much better than the Japanese alternatives selling today?

What $3000 camera can I buy today that records RAW 24p footage to solid state media at 1080 resolution or better?

[antiquaeuropa]

What $3000 camera can I buy today that records RAW 24p footage to solid state media at 1080 resolution or better?

How exactly is recording to solid state going to show up in the picture?

Sure Red Code Raw is better, but just how much a difference do you think that your audience will see? That is a minimal part of the difference between cheap video and Hollywood compared to the vastly different depth of field.

Actually there are many cameras that do solid state 24p at 1080p for under $1300, but they are RAW so I won't bother listing them.

[Gabriel Winebrenner]

What $3000 camera can I buy today that records RAW 24p footage to solid state media at 1080 resolution or better?

If that's all you need in a cinematographer's piece of equipment, Best Buy might have one, and if not, you could try Circuit City or Fry's......

[Kyle Hance]

Right again. I hate that Red is shifting its focus into this dumbed down area of video. I thought that they pioneering "Digital Cinema." Of course, it will be a great value for the money, and very likely it will sell well. But what will Red focus on? Well now it is not clear. Instead of getting their camera that "renders obsolesce obsolete" totally right they are off in prosumer la-la land. Sure they can do it better than the others if they want, but why? Is the area even worth much time or talent going into it? Sony does it for money. Why is Red doing it? What sort of moving stuff are you guys planning on shooting with Scarlet? I would be surprised if someone makes a decent feature film with it.

Since when is 3K not digital cinema? If I'm not mistaken, most, if not all, digitial cinemas project in 2K.......... And, yeah, it has a fixed lense..... So what? I would be PSYCHED to have a Scarlet. RAW 3K @ up to 120 FPS for $3k! That's INCREDIBLE! Stop whining! So, the Scarlet's not for you. It is for a bunch of other people. Go get yourself a freakin' Red ONE and shut-up.


If that's all you need in a cinematographer's piece of equipment, Best Buy might have one, and if not, you could try Circuit City or Fry's......

Try.... NONE OF THOSE. You cannot find a video camera that even shoot's RAW at any of those places. Yes, you can find cameras that shoot 1080p @ 24 FPS. But none with RAW.

[kmikami]

If that's all you need in a cinematographer's piece of equipment, Best Buy might have one, and if not, you could try Circuit City or Fry's......

OK, name one. I'll buy it tomorrow. You can't because it doesn't exist.

If you guys truly believe that shallow DOF is more important to image quality than resolution or RAW shooting then I'm guessing that you don't actually make images for a living.

I would take a sharp, clean image with deep focus any day over an "artsy" image with shallow DOF but increased noise, compression artifacts and CA.

[proaudio4]

I would take a sharp, clean image with deep focus any day over an "artsy" image with shallow DOF but increased noise, compression artifacts and CA.

Actually, we have no idea on the Scarlet image quality. Based on RED ONE, it should be decent. I'm excited about Scarlet, but it's so far until we see what it's really about.

[Virum]

I find that many people that really want shallow depth of field are the people that haven't really worked with it. I used to be that way, so I bought a 35mm adapter.

If you are ultra low budget indie this is just another thing that can go wrong. You really need a good focus puller. You need good actors that can hit a mark consistently. If you are using a dolly you need a dolly grip that can hit his mark as well.

And then if you are tired of having so much depth of field, you will need ass loads of light so that you can close that lens up a bit.

If deep focus worked for Orson Welles, it will work for you.

[Cory Mitchell]

I remember when Red was first announced a couple years ago. I remember the mysterious site that promised ridiculous promises. People were skeptical. 4k at $17,500? Yeah right, scam.

And then I watched as the attention grew, people adapted, and now, I've heard people complain about the price. Now, that doesn't mean I can afford the Red One, I can't, but I have a healthy dose of perspective.

Scarlet. I think the specs for Scarlet are unbelievable. There is no other 3k camera out there that can record at this quality, period. For $3,000? Hell no.

I just looked at the two cheapest HD lens interchangeable cameras that I'm aware of, the Canon XL-H1 (1080i, $7,999) and the GY-HD200U (720p, $5,795). (There may be others that I'm not aware of, but...)

People are seriously treating this like a fast food restaurant. I understand why people have placed so much emphasis on certain features, but I also think it's obvious that Red has read these forums and conscientiously made the choices they made.

In my opinion, give them a little more respect than has been given, and stop treating this like a botched fast food order. I don't mean that offensively, it just sounds like a spoiled kid who didn't exactly get what they ordered for Christmas, around here. Perspective.

Keep up the amazing work Red.

visionmind

[Bing Bailey]

guys you can't base the quality on RED ONE for the simple reason that scarlet will have a new sensor. the same sensor that will be standard as the sensor in epic and the upgradable sensor in RED ONE. it'll probably have greater DR and a non hobbled rock solid lens. christ you could buy two scarlets and some accessories for below 10k and shoot a pretty rocking movie with an A & B Cam

[Gabriel Winebrenner]

I remember when Red was first announced a couple years ago. I remember the mysterious site that promised ridiculous promises. People were skeptical. 4k at $17,500? Yeah right, scam.

And then I watched as the attention grew, people adapted, and now, I've heard people complain about the price. Now, that doesn't mean I can afford the Red One, I can't, but I have a healthy dose of perspective.

Scarlet. I think the specs for Scarlet are unbelievable. There is no other 3k camera out there that can record at this quality, period. For $3,000? Hell no.

I just looked at the two cheapest HD lens interchangeable cameras that I'm aware of, the Canon XL-H1 (1080i, $7,999) and the GY-HD200U (720p, $5,795). (There may be others that I'm not aware of, but...)

People are seriously treating this like a fast food restaurant. I understand why people have placed so much emphasis on certain features, but I also think it's obvious that Red has read these forums and conscientiously made the choices they made.

In my opinion, give them a little more respect than has been given, and stop treating this like a botched fast food order. I don't mean that offensively, it just sounds like a spoiled kid who didn't exactly get what they ordered for Christmas, around here. Perspective.

Keep up the amazing work Red.

visionmind

Listen man. Jim said to expect changes in the model. This isn't a fast food joint. This is RED were talking about here. I'm not going to jump out on a limb and treat Jim like some demi-God and say that every idea that comes about from a prototype model should be set in stone. That's not the way RED works to my knowledge and that's not how I work either. Artistically I've done a lot of things that sometimes are criticized. Sometimes, I realize, some criticisms are good and my art becomes better with such insight which I wasn't able to see. It's not like the person does your art for you. It's like a hot girlfriend saying what could be better about something and with your vision, you suddenly come up with something that much better. And suddenly not just 20 peeps are like, hey that rocks, but now there are 100s and your like, I am the shit, and the hot girl actually had my back or rather I had hers for a sec.

The Canon XL-H1=shit, not even true 24p, interface problems and hdv

the hvx200 is better but it's resolution sucks

The Scarlet will become even better with added lens options and will become the true little sis' of the RED ONE. That is a promise. If not, I'm gonna pimp myself to a parlor and see what happens......

[John Caballero]

Oh boy! I remember when Jim said, what was it? Oh. "The inmates are running the asylum". And just when you thought this forum couldn't get any wackier you have a new wave of digital cinema "experts" entering the door. Is this place gonna be like this for the next year? Oh boy again....

[antiquaeuropa]

Since when is 3K not digital cinema? If I'm not mistaken, most, if not all, digitial cinemas project in 2K.......... And, yeah, it has a fixed lense..... So what? I would be PSYCHED to have a Scarlet. RAW 3K @ up to 120 FPS for $3k! That's INCREDIBLE! Stop whining! So, the Scarlet's not for you. It is for a bunch of other people. Go get yourself a freakin' Red ONE and shut-up.

The concept of Digital Cinema is used to differentiate a certainly level of quality digital acquisition from more common video. The chief difference with Red with the size of the sensor (of course the RAW compression and 4k are great too). Red did not arbitrarily determine the size but rather borrowed the gold standard of size for serious cinema. 2/3" defies this concept of something apart from video. People who know little about cameras look at footage from these small chip video cameras and recognize it as not quite cinematic. Digital Cinema blurs that line. Scarlet won't.

[Garrett M. Smith]

3k RAW.
2/3" sensor.
HD-SDI.
120fps.
Built-in lens.
only $3000??!??!??!?

F$%@ YEAH!

Considering only 4 yrs ago, I paid more for the DVX - only 1/3", decimated color, and SD!

This is awesome. Pure and simply awesome. Nice work, RED. I'll line up to buy one when it's ready.

Garrett

[Jonathan Wheeler]

The problem I have with most of the complaints, is not that they are dissatisfied with the features of Scarlet as they stand, but that they act as if Jim and Co. have personally set out to ruin their aspiring film careers by shortchanging them on camera features. Lets take all this drama we're injecting into this forum and put it into some screenplays instead. Then when you can afford whatever you want to shoot with you can tell a great story!

[Hrvoje Simic]

Sure Red Code Raw is better, but just how much a difference do you think that your audience will see? That is a minimal part of the difference between cheap video and Hollywood compared to the vastly different depth of field.


Than you probably didn't watch your footage turn to s**t due to compression artifacts when your clients wanted it treated to "look more like film" ?

Do you understand the difference between raw workflow and compressed data workflow ?