Scarletuser.com

[Ravell]

Scarletuser.com
Scarletcamera.com
and
Scarlet2k.com

were registered by Jarred Land on January 2nd, 2008. Could be others, these were all I found.

Just adding fuel to the 2k speculation. :)
Seems pretty likely, if not a "given."

[Kreisky]

do you think that Movie "Cloverfield" was shot on the Scarlet ?

[BASSAM MSSALATIE]

Who knows maybe ? or maybe it is imagination ..:sad:

[Bruce Allen]

Great find, Ravell!


do you think that Movie "Cloverfield" was shot on the Scarlet ?

No, Cloverfield was shot mostly on an HVX200, with some F23 and Viper for the effects shots.

People don't like to mention the HVX200 part because it messes up their world view that their talent is being held back by their equipment, when clearly it's their ideas that primarily need work.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.ocm

[Michael Hastings]

Scarletuser.com
Scarletcamera.com
and
Scarlet2k.com

were registered by Jarred Land on January 2nd, 2008. Could be others, these were all I found.

Just adding fuel to the 2k speculation. :)
Seems pretty likely, if not a "given."

scarlet2k seems pretty convincing unless it is a trick. If it is 2K, unless it uses full s35 sensor I don't see the point over existing 1920 x 1080 cameras - only 7 less resolution.

[Brook Willard]

Well I guess Scarlet's a 2K camera.

[Michael Schrengohst]

Great find, Ravell!



No, Cloverfield was shot mostly on an HVX200, with some F23 and Viper for the effects shots.

People don't like to mention the HVX200 part because it messes up their world view that their talent is being held back by their equipment, when clearly it's their ideas that primarily need work.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.ocm

The director of Cloverfield said one of the main actors was the op on the HVX and probably shot enough to get his union card.

[Bruce Allen]

scarlet2k seems pretty convincing unless it is a trick. If it is 2K, unless it uses full s35 sensor I don't see the point over existing 1920 x 1080 cameras - only 7 less resolution.

Agreed, it is something of a mystery... so, the competitors would be:

HV20 - $650. One 1.9K sensor. 1/2.7 in size, active area ???. HDV. Good enough to print to film for if you're VERY careful (we used it for the Leatherheads theatrical trailer).

EX-1 - $6500. Three 1.9K sensors, supposedly 1/2 inch size each, but active area ???. If you put red, green and blue sensors next to each other, you'd compete with S16 film area? IMHO would print to film no problem.

Silicon Imaging mini - $12500. One 2K sensor, 2/3" size, supposdly S16 film sensing area? Probably also no problem going to film.

Now, if they're announcing a prototype at NAB, we would expect it to SMOKE all of the above in price / performance or simply do stuff the others cannot... by the time it comes out even the EX-1 would have been out for quite a while.

I will personally hope they either go for a cheap-ish HV20-killer (not likely) or a Aaton (not likely to fit in pocket, sadly) - or for something a bit out-of-the-box, like super high-speed ( If Jim was carrying it in his pocket, he'd want to film drag races, right?) and modular? So you'd carry the imaging part in one pocket and the recording / processing part in another, with battery on your belt...

Ah well, probably I won't be able to afford it again. I will just have to keep being nice to you Redusers ;)

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Nathan Garofalos]

Agreed, it is something of a mystery... so, the competitors would be:

HV20 - $650. One 1.9K sensor. 1/2.7 in size, active area ???. HDV. Good enough to print to film for if you're VERY careful (we used it for the Leatherheads theatrical trailer).

EX-1 - $6500. Three 1.9K sensors, supposedly 1/2 inch size each, but active area ???. If you put red, green and blue sensors next to each other, you'd compete with S16 film area? IMHO would print to film no problem.

Silicon Imaging mini - $12500. One 2K sensor, 2/3" size, supposdly S16 film sensing area? Probably also no problem going to film.

Now, if they're announcing a prototype at NAB, we would expect it to SMOKE all of the above in price / performance or simply do stuff the others cannot... by the time it comes out even the EX-1 would have been out for quite a while.

I will personally hope they either go for a cheap-ish HV20-killer (not likely) or a Aaton (not likely to fit in pocket, sadly) - or for something a bit out-of-the-box, like super high-speed ( If Jim was carrying it in his pocket, he'd want to film drag races, right?) and modular? So you'd carry the imaging part in one pocket and the recording / processing part in another, with battery on your belt...

Ah well, probably I won't be able to afford it again. I will just have to keep being nice to you Redusers ;)

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Bruce,

If I purchase a Scarlet we should shoot something together!!! Are you going to NAB?

[Eugene]

http://www.kudostrophies.com/neon-kudos.gif
Ravell, you are the man.

[Nathan Troutman]

Hey Jarred - you're busted:sarcasm: 2K, ha! Don't worry your secret is safe with us.

:calm:

2K!!!! 2K everyone!!!
:calm:

[Petr Dvorak]

Are you sure? Maybe its just little deceit from Jarred :sarcasm:


Hey Jarred - you're busted:sarcasm: 2K, ha! Don't worry your secret is safe with us.

:calm:

2K!!!! 2K everyone!!!
:calm:

[Ethan Cooper]

Just because I love wild speculation:

If they are setting up a ScarletUser.net site, and they have already stated that she wont compete with Red One, then it is highly likely that she is very small, fixed lens, with full auto controls, but with the option of full manual so that it fits the moniker "pro".
Scarlet will be positioned for and marketed to a less technically skilled and experienced crowd that Red One and to keep Reduser from becoming filled with the type of questions these users will ask they activate ScarletUser.
Two cameras, two different purposes and markets, two forums geared toward each of those segments.
Not to anger anyone here by insinuating anything but "professional" but I think Red might be going after the Prosumers and high end consumer market with Scarlet. If you think about it, this might make sense with their rumblings about 4K (and lower) delivery to the home and upcoming projectors and monitors. If they have a 2K camera on the market that the masses can afford, then they need some way for them to take advantage of that technology to it's fullest in the home.
Does any of this make logical sense? I just woke up and my brain isn't fully engaged yet.
________
TEEN VIDS (http://teenvid.org)

[Paris Remillard]

I'm guessing something like the Phantom Miro, or SI-2k Mini.

[Jonathan E.]

do you think that Movie "Cloverfield" was shot on the Scarlet ?

If you stay though all of the credits, you find a big Panavision logo slaped on the bottom. I honestly think it was shot on the Genisis, after all they could never get the boke they did with a HVX200. Also if you notice in the movie the "camera man" never points the camera down - especially when he is running. This leads me to believe that the operator had the camera on his shoulder. Also i didn't seem to be shaky enough to be an HVX. But then again they could have had some stablizer on it, but it just defeat the purpose of the look.

as for the Scarlet being used on the movie, I highly doubt that big hollywood production company would take a chance with a prototype camera on there multi million dollar blockbuster. Then again, I can be proven wrong. lets hope that an article will come out in AC mag.

[Brook Willard]

There is also a Kodak logo after Cloverfield...

[Dylan Reeve]

This was discussed in the Off Topic forum (Cloverfield) - it was shot largely on HVX, with Genesis for FX shots, and F23 for exterior FX shots.

Some of the trailer stuff, and possibly some shots in the film were with a consumer HD camera that shoots to SD card, I believe. I don't know what it was.

I see scarlet4k.com is currently in 'ClientHold' status - but that's probably just response to the sites listed here.

[Kreisky]

why is evereybody so pissed about the fact it is a 2k ?
Most people dont have 40.000 $ for the Red one !
But maybe they have in April the oppurtunity to have a cheaper Red One !
When Red came out, people in the filmindustry were frustraded that you can buy a good cinema camera for 45.000.-$, and save postproduction costs !
Same shit with the Scarlet !? pleaze let it be(e)

[Aiden Cornwell]

why is evereybody so pissed about the fact it is a 2k ?
Most people dont have 40.000 $ for the Red one !
But maybe they have in April the oppurtunity to have a cheaper Red One !
When Red came out, people in the filmindustry were frustraded that you can buy a good cinema camera for 45.000.-$, and save post production costs !
Same shit with the Scarlet !? pleaze let it be(e)

Well said. Scarlet I expect will be for the true Indie film maker/VFX artist.

4K is still a pipe dream for many. Most theaters don't even have a 2k projectors not to mention all the tv markets that has no use for 4k.

I still expect Scaret to not be prosumer in the fact that it will still need redcine, red alert for post. This will also scare away those prosumer people who want a point a shoot camera, have no use for high end post processes and VFX work.

[Stephen Gentle]

If they are setting up a ScarletUser.net site, and they have already stated that she wont compete with Red One, then it is highly likely that she is very small, fixed lens, with full auto controls, but with the option of full manual so that it fits the moniker "pro".

I don't think I'd call something with a fixed lens 'professional' unless it was like the Iconix or a lipstick cam...

And I have some Nikon glass I really want to use on this thing...

[Christian Edwards]

im sure with 2k it will have a smaller sensor so they will be able to bump up the frame rate quite a bit 240+

[Joseph Hutson]

It will definitely be at least 2K because of the US Trademarks put on it, but wouldn't it be something if red blew us away with a 4K camera? ...don't think its happenin' though

[Jeremy Hughes]

I think it's going to be a 2540p camera that costs $2K, hence scarlet2k.com is going to be a fansite showing praise for the price.

I think that scarletuser.com is going to be a redirect to the scarlet section (going to have a lot of sub-forums) like HVXuser is to DVXuser.

[Lauri Kettunen]

If had to bet, I would count the most on these two issues:

1) Scientifically it is known that in this kind of situations the average of all the guessing is often pretty accurate. Maybe somebody knows the name of this, but the point is that a large group of people tend to make better estimates than any single expert. Historically, the idea was invented about 100 years (?) ago, when somebody asked the audience of a farm exhibition to guess the weight of a cow. The average of the very large number of guesses turned out to accurate within tens of grams.

2) If Red follows ordinary business strategies, then Scarlet will share as much technology with Red One as possible within the decided frame of costs. This did not imply Scarlet is a 4K camera, but rather something like CF-card data storage, same audio hardware as in Red One, perhaps the lcd of Red One EVF is exploited in Scarlet, perhaps the mini xlr's, RedCine workflow and so on.

[Jarred Land]

ha ha ha.. I grabbed scarlet2k.com after someone posted the (quite public) old 2k Trademark info as "Scarlet2k".. I kinda liked the way it sounded, thats all.

Trust me, if this was some sort of "secret info" or actually revealing some sort of telling info, it wouldn't still be here..

[Finner]

Trust me, if this was some sort of "secret info" or actually revealing some sort of telling info, it wouldn't still be here..

Info like this stuff below that was posted on cine.....com


Mark Image
Word Mark SCARLET 2K
Goods and Services IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Digital cinema camera systems and accessories, sold individually or as a unit, comprised of, cameras, camera lenses, flash memory cards, electronic memories, hard drives for video recorders, video monitors and flat panel display screens, all for use in the creation, storage, delivery, manipulation, recording, playback or viewing of video, music, graphics, photos, audio, text, and multimedia data; cinematographic projectors; photographic projectors; slide projectors; computer programs for digital cinema cameras; audio and visual educational and teaching apparatus and instruments, namely, computer hardware and computer software programs for the integration of text, audio, graphics, still image and moving pictures into an interactive delivery for multimedia applications, computer white boards, video projectors and video display monitors

IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Leasing or rental of cinema equipment and systems for use in the creation, storage, delivery, manipulation, recording, playback or viewing of video, music, graphics and audio and video broadcasting in a specified image format

IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: Development of new technology for others in the field of image format technology involving or relating to the dissemination, broadcast or transmission of video, music, graphics, photos, audio, text, multimedia, computer programs and data in a specified image format, and consultation related thereto
Standard Characters Claimed
Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number 77083222
Filing Date January 15, 2007
Current Filing Basis 1B
Original Filing Basis 1B
Published for Opposition January 22, 2008
Owner (APPLICANT) Red.com, Inc. CORPORATION WASHINGTON P.O. Box 1389 Eastsound WASHINGTON 98245
Attorney of Record Janet Robertson Kaufman
Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "2K" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN
Type of Mark TRADEMARK. SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

[Jarred Land]

yeah.. all public records. nothing that exciting.

[Finner]

yeah.. all public records. nothing that exciting.

Nothing to see here folks, move along please.

[Ravell]

yeah.. all public records. nothing that exciting.

So give us something exciting already! :) The Scarlet sub-forum is all dressed up with no place to go...

[I Bloom]

These aren't the droids you're looking for...move along.

[Eugene]

http://www.springfieldcolorado.com/a01/cat-bag400.jpg
It only makes sense to use the same Mysterium chip and Red Code that has already been developed. No need to reinvent the wheel. Now will it be windowed? Will it use rangefinder or S16 lenses? AF? That is all stuff we don't know. But It will be 2K. It is undeniable. It just makes me not trust Jarred. It ain't just a river in Egypt.

[I Bloom]

It only makes sense to use the same Mysterium chip and Red Code that has already been developed. No need to reinvent the wheel. Now will it be windowed? Will it use rangefinder or S16 lenses? AF? That is all stuff we don't know. But It will be 2K. It is undeniable. It just makes me not trust Jarred. It ain't just a river in Egypt.

You can trust Jarred. All he's saying is that he's not saying anything.

I doubt its the same chip, as the cost of the chip likely goes down as it becomes smaller. Instead I'd predict a 2K chip with Redcode stuff the same.

IBloom

[Buck Forester]

I'm not much of a speculator, but I'm guessing the Scarlet is all about smart marketing. They've put a lot of resources into developing RED and I'm sure they'll make moolah off the venture, but why not tap into a much larger market with the $2,000-$6,000 cams that 90% of us buy? The RED is priced good for its features, but it's still out of the range of most small independent flmers (and serious hobbyists). The lenses and high-end computers required for editing RED footage is 'relatively' expensive too. If you can use your existing technology, strip some of the fancy bells and whistles so you're not hurting your high-end product, yet still appealing to the serious videographers in the Sony EX1 - Panny HVX200 market where you'll sell a lot more units, I call it a win-win for RED and videographers. Mr. Jannard didn't get to where he is today by accident. There's a smart brain behind them sunglasses and we all benefit. I'm buying the Sony EX1 now because I need it (and I like it), and if the specs and price are right with this Scarlet, I'm sure I'll be needing a second camera when it comes out. I tip my hat to Mr. Jannard for his entrepreneurism and dedication to success.

[durangotang]

ha ha ha.. I grabbed scarlet2k.com after someone posted the (quite public) old 2k Trademark info as "Scarlet2k".. I kinda liked the way it sounded, thats all.

Trust me, if this was some sort of "secret info" or actually revealing some sort of telling info, it wouldn't still be here..

Jarred, can you tell me why you liked the way it sounded? You are a really smart guy and I am curious, if the camera is going to be 4k, why did Scarlet2k.com sound like a good name to buy? That doesn't make much sense to me, kind of like Panasonic marketing a 1080P television with a 720P.com domain name. Or Intel marketing a 4ghz chip with a 2ghz.com domain name.

To me, Scarlet2k.com communicates 3 things:

1) The name Scarlet.
2) 2k resolution.
and
3) By the mere fact that resolution is mentioned, you can infer that resolution is the key differentiator from the Red One as the current domain is just red.com. After all, you didn't buy ScarletPocketCam.com, ScarletFlashCam.com, Scarlet4k.com or even RedScarlet.com.

Please don't tell me it has anything to do with the year 2000 ;-)
Perhaps the price is $2k (haha yeah right)

Thanks in advance for you clarification on this matter.

I could understand if it did 4k at 24fps, and really performed at high frame rates at 2k and was more optimized for 2k across the board. Then the emphasis would be on 2k would be warranted, but I still don't think I'd market it as 2k if it had any reasonable 4k performance.

[Priyesh P.]

A lot of times I question the intelligence of some forum members. Go to: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7200 , brooke summarized the facts and I remember Jim Jannard saying a couple of times that the camera is going to be a "professional" one, not consumer, not prosumer but clearly "professional". And still people are presuming that it's going to be a prosumer cam.

[Priyesh P.]

If had to bet, I would count the most on these two issues:

1) Scientifically it is known that in this kind of situations the average of all the guessing is often pretty accurate. Maybe somebody knows the name of this, but the point is that a large group of people tend to make better estimates than any single expert. Historically, the idea was invented about 100 years (?) ago, when somebody asked the audience of a farm exhibition to guess the weight of a cow. The average of the very large number of guesses turned out to accurate within tens of grams.


Vox populi , by Francis Galton

[Mark Toia]

I wonder....
Young designer downstairs recons this is it.
As you can see he's a RED nut....Then again, so am I.

[Mark Toia]

Minus the dinky lens, be cool if it was.

[Ravell]

Very nicely done! I remain cynical as to the indie filmmaker appeal Scarlet seems to have prematurely garnered - it could just as easily be a Sumix-like remote head or a lipstick/helmet cam - but I for one would not be disappointed if your friend was right.

[Paul Hazlett]

I wonder....
Young designer downstairs recons this is it.
As you can see he's a RED nut....Then again, so am I.

I think he is close but I think he forgot to include the flip out lcd.
I would be shocked if Scarlet did not have a flip out.

[Mark Toia]

yeah me too, when he first sent it up, I scoffed at it, but the more I think of every Car ad I've ever shot, the time I would have saved per day if I had a camera like this that I could stick into little holes and put onto crazy rigs without the need of ripping off steering wheels and pulling seats and windows out, just to get a simple shot.
I'm so so hoping its at least 2k res, Ill be buying a box of them without blinking an eye.

[Gene Crucean]

That's actually a pretty nice concept and I hope it's no smaller than that for the record. I know people keep saying that this isn't going to be a mini-red but whatever.

[Andrew Hewlett]

I wonder....
Young designer downstairs recons this is it.
As you can see he's a RED nut....Then again, so am I.

Nice...now just replace the attached lens with a Nikon F mount and we're in business!

[Seth Dalton]

People don't like to mention the HVX200 part because it messes up their world view that their talent is being held back by their equipment, when clearly it's their ideas that primarily need work.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.ocm

Such wise words!

[Fergus Anderson]

I wonder....
Young designer downstairs recons this is it.
As you can see he's a RED nut....Then again, so am I.

looks like a canon HV10
nice!

[Robert Batta]

looks like a canon HV10
nice!

yes HV10 with 35mm DOF ;)

[Nathan Garofalos]

Where did you get your mount? Is it a PL mount? That is REALLY cool.

[Aiden Cornwell]

A lot of times I question the intelligence of some forum members. Go to: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7200 , brooke summarized the facts and I remember Jim Jannard saying a couple of times that the camera is going to be a "professional" one, not consumer, not prosumer but clearly "professional". And still people are presuming that it's going to be a prosumer cam.

But what is professional? Many people have a different concept to what they consider prosumer and what they consider pro. An example this is a list of Pro Cameras on B&H website

With Scarlet it will most likely offer RED RAW which means understanding how to colour grade a shot will be important and having to use Red cine or Red alert alone will make Scarlet a pro camera.


Canon XL-2 1/3-Inch 3-CCD Widescreen MiniDV Camcorder with 24P Recording, 20x Optical Zoom Lens and Advanced Optical Image Stabilizer

XH-A1 3CCD HDV Camcorder, 1080i, 16:9, 20x Lens, 24f Mode

XL-H1 3-CCD Native 16:9 High Definition 1080i Camcorder with 20x HD Video Zoom Lens, SMPTE TC, Genlock, FireWire and HD/SD-SDI Output

JVC
GY-HD200CHU 1/3" 3-CCD Professional HDV Camcorder with 60/24-Frame Progressive Recording (without Lens)
JVC GYHD200CHU Professional HDV Camcorder

GY-HD110U 1/3" 3-CCD Professional HDV Camcorder with 16x Fujinon Lens and 24-Frame Progressive Recording

AG-HVX200 3-CCD P2/DVCPRO HD Format Camcorder with Widescreen Aspect Ratio, 720p, 1080i and 24-Frame HDTV Recording

AG-DVC20 3CCD 1/6" Professional Mini DV Camcorder, 4:3, 10x Optical Zoom, 500x Digital Zoom

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/shop/1881/Professional_Camcorders_Camcorders_ENG_.html

[Robert Batta]

Where did you get your mount? Is it a PL mount? That is REALLY cool.

thanks,
is a static 35mm DOF adapter with Nikon mount (nikon macro tube)

[Mufu Giwa]

Secret definitely busted with Mr. Finner's finding, Scarlet is without doubt a 2K procam to compete with the SI-2K range of cameras. And... we're already excited about that, and by the way, can we know the price already?.

[killfilm]

maybe scarlet is a 2k camera for 2k dollars :greedy:

[Joseph Hutson]

How 'bout 4K for $4K :greedy:

[Nathan Buxton]

A 2k camera, with a sensor of the same physical dimensions as a 35mm frame, would offer MORE or LESS dynamic range and/or low-light capability versus a 4k sensor of the same dimensions?

[redrum]

More of both.

[Stephen Gentle]

A 2k camera, with a sensor of the same physical dimensions as a 35mm frame, would offer MORE or LESS dynamic range and/or low-light capability versus a 4k sensor of the same dimensions?

Well a 2K sensor would be more sensitive to light, having bigger photosites, which would help - but it's not the only ingredient of dynamic range.

[Mark K.]

Jim has already made it fairly explicit that Scarlet will not compete with the Red One in form or features. This almost certainly rules out the possibility of the camera being a self-contained unit - when I first heard about the camera I assumed it would have to be digital s16mm camera (something that does for 16mm equivalent digital capture, what Red One does for s35mm equivalent digital capture), but the more snippets I hear the more convinced I am that Scarlet won't possess anything like a convential video camera form.

So I for one will be very suprised if the camera doesn't turn out to be something akin to the Iconix camera (i.e. modular, pocketable) and not at all what I wished for - the digital Aaton Aminima of my dreams...

*sigh*

[simonfilm]

Grug, perhaps it could be the digital Ikonoskop A-CAM of your dreams. Not so good dreams, but not bad.

You can see it at:

http://www.ikonoskop.com/

The "flying part" is not included ;-)

[Joseph Hutson]

I am game for the flying part...who needs a boom then?!?

[Lawrence Bansbach]

To me, Scarlet2k.com communicates 3 things . . .Domain name registrations are cheap. Scarlet2k.com could be a ruse, a diversion, a Red Herring.

[Patrick Tresch]

How 'bout 4K for $4K :greedy:

I'm ready to pay 8k!!!!:biggrin:

Pat

[Joseph Hutson]

I'm ready to pay 8k!!!!:biggrin:

Pat

Still not happenin' :-)

It's gonna be 2K

[Mike S. M.]

Agreed, it is something of a mystery... so, the competitors would be:

HV20 - $650. One 1.9K sensor. 1/2.7 in size, active area ???. HDV. Good enough to print to film for if you're VERY careful (we used it for the Leatherheads theatrical trailer).

How very careful or what specifically are we talking about here?

[Bruce Allen]

How very careful or what specifically are we talking about here?

Lighting. Specifically, you need to use a lot of light to avoid noise. Furthermore, you want to avoid nasty highlights so that means diffusion - and that of course increases your need for lumens even more.

For example, for Leatherheads, Jake brought his sweet Mole Richardson tungsten lighting kit and I brought my battered Arri 1.2K HMI which I had bought for around $1500 (the ballast looks like a prop from the original Star Wars ;). If you bought everything new you'd probably have the irony of using $8000+ worth of lights and a $650 camera.

Personally I enjoy doing things this way - figuring out how to light things properly is always more fun when you're not using an expensive camera and hence have less time pressure.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[chuckt]

Lighting. Specifically, you need to use a lot of light to avoid noise. Furthermore, you want to avoid nasty highlights so that means diffusion - and that of course increases your need for lumens even more.

For example, for Leatherheads, Jake brought his sweet Mole Richardson tungsten lighting kit and I brought my battered Arri 1.2K HMI which I had bought for around $1500 (the ballast looks like a prop from the original Star Wars ;). If you bought everything new you'd probably have the irony of using $8000+ worth of lights and a $650 camera.

Personally I enjoy doing things this way - figuring out how to light things properly is always more fun when you're not using an expensive camera and hence have less time pressure.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Try Fluorescent Kits from Pacific coast lighting . For $1100, you can get 5 piece set. That is all you need.

[Ravell]

For example, for Leatherheads, Jake brought his sweet Mole Richardson tungsten lighting kit and I brought my battered Arri 1.2K HMI which I had bought for around $1500 (the ballast looks like a prop from the original Star Wars ;). If you bought everything new you'd probably have the irony of using $8000+ worth of lights and a $650 camera.

Personally I enjoy doing things this way - figuring out how to light things properly is always more fun when you're not using an expensive camera and hence have less time pressure.

Bruce, that's awesome! Which shots in the trailer are from the HV20 and why was that the camera of choice?

[Bruce Allen]

Bruce, that's awesome! Which shots in the trailer are from the HV20 and why was that the camera of choice?

Every time you see a name ("GEORGE CLOONEY", "LEATHERHEADS", etc), there is a close-up of a football rotating in the background. We shot that on my HV20.

Why? Well, I had been playing with my HV20 recently and was impressed by how sharp it was. Also, we thought that for that particular project it'd be smart to save money on the shoot and spend more time on the post. Finally, the workflow (with much-maligned-around-here-"not good enough for broadcast"-HDV) was super simple. We had an HVX200 as backup but didn't really see the need (also under bright light it is not much higher res than the HV20, I think?).

EDIT: now with all of that said, it's kinda weird seeing all of those "wish list" posts for Scarlet, where they list what's basically somewhere around an EX1, yet price it over the EX1?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[I Bloom]

Domain name registrations are cheap. Scarlet2k.com could be a ruse, a diversion, a Red Herring.

God help you dude.:wacko:

Kind of like when the manual came out with the 3K option in Build 14 a couple weeks early. It was clearly a typo at the time....

It's a 2K camera!!! Shout it from the hills!:devil: Do you need to see it in skywriting?

IBloom

[Mike S. M.]

Lighting. Specifically, you need to use a lot of light to avoid noise. Furthermore, you want to avoid nasty highlights so that means diffusion - and that of course increases your need for lumens even more.

I see. So as long as you throw enough light at it and maybe under expose a 1/2 stop to protect for high lights you should be fine(?).
But how about all the consumer functions and controls? How much of a hassle is to work around that? Could you see yourself for example shooting a whole movie with it?


For example, for Leatherheads, Jake brought his sweet Mole Richardson tungsten lighting kit and I brought my battered Arri 1.2K HMI which I had bought for around $1500 (the ballast looks like a prop from the original Star Wars ;). If you bought everything new you'd probably have the irony of using $8000+ worth of lights and a $650 camera.

Well since those lights will last you forever and will never really be obsolete and the HV20 will be yesterday news in a couple of years, investing more on lighting always made more sense to me.



Every time you see a name ("GEORGE CLOONEY", "LEATHERHEADS", etc), there is a close-up of a football rotating in the background. We shot that on my HV20.

Why? Well, I had been playing with my HV20 recently and was impressed by how sharp it was. Also, we thought that for that particular project it'd be smart to save money on the shoot and spend more time on the post.

Great job! It looks extremely sharp. But it's an extreme close up too. Most cameras would look sharp. But it looks great nonetheless. I'm thinking it was shot straight without a 35mm adapter? If the HV20 is as light hungry as you say I imagine a 35mm adapter would make it nearly impossible to shoot indoors or at night. Also the great sharpness you got would be substantially reduced by the ground glass.
By the way, what format was the film shot with?


Finally, the workflow (with much-maligned-around-here-"not good enough for broadcast"-HDV) was super simple. We had an HVX200 as backup but didn't really see the need (also under bright light it is not much higher res than the HV20, I think?).

Oh the HV20 is definitely sharper than the HVX200. Actually I think pretty much all 1/3" HD/HDV cameras are sharper than the HVX200. The HVX is really soft. Too soft for my tastes actually. The HV20 seems to be sharper than most of the 1/3" cameras too.


EDIT: now with all of that said, it's kinda weird seeing all of those "wish list" posts for Scarlet, where they list what's basically somewhere around an EX1, yet price it over the EX1?

Yes. The EX1 is an impressive camera. It's the closest to F900 quality we ever been in the sub 10K category. I actually think it would be hard to tell them apart on the big screen if shot properly. But I heard about some lens problems and other quirks that are turning people off.

[Paul Hazlett]

EDIT: now with all of that said, it's kinda weird seeing all of those "wish list" posts for Scarlet, where they list what's basically somewhere around an EX1, yet price it over the EX1?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

This gets back to chip size. the EX1 is 1/2" chips, 3 cmos chips. I think scarlets chip, single cmos, will be larger, to get all the benefits a larger chip
enjoys, plus removable lenses and not just and ons like brevis.

I also think Scarlet will be sub 5K in price.

[Joe Carney]

Has anyone noticed at red.com that scarlet is now called a digital cinema camera, not a motion capture camera as in the past?
bodes well.

[Aiden Cornwell]

Has anyone noticed at red.com that scarlet is now called a digital cinema camera, not a motion capture camera as in the past?
bodes well.

It was always called a pocket professional digital cinema camera on the main web page.

However I see the fact that the EX-1 comes in at around 7k that Scarlet will hopefully come in sub 4k as I see Scarlet blowing the EX-1 out of the water for digital cinema work.

[Bruce Allen]

This gets back to chip size. the EX1 is 1/2" chips, 3 cmos chips. I think scarlets chip, single cmos, will be larger, to get all the benefits a larger chip
enjoys, plus removable lenses and not just and ons like brevis.

I also think Scarlet will be sub 5K in price.

Agreed - personally I'd love PL or Nikon or C-mount lenses, but everyone gets upset when we say that - they don't see how that fits with the whole "pocket" thing. Agreed, even a small Aaton isn't exactly pocketable.



However I see the fact that the EX-1 comes in at around 7k that Scarlet will hopefully come in sub 4k as I see Scarlet blowing the EX-1 out of the water for digital cinema work.

Just playing devil's advocate here... anyone want to point me to photographic evidence that Red in 2k windowed mode blows the EX1 away? The EX1's latitude and resolution is pretty impressive. The total surface area of 3 1/2" CCDs is pretty decent. Also, the on-board lens is decent and mechanical, so you can pull focus with it. The EX1 also has real audio pots and a nice Avid workflow.

The EX1 was announced at the 2007 NAB. So, I'm hoping that either Red will surprise us and have Scarlet ready for shipping, or that their 2008 NAB announcement be specced so it will truly seem like it's a year ahead of the EX1. Or, it will go for a different market than the EX1.

Let's see, the EX1 is currently selling for $6.5K, including viewfinder, a small LCD, XLR audio inputs, a battery and TWO 8gb storage cards. If Scarlet a sub $4-5k EX1-killer that'd be great. But Red is a small company - they are hard-working geniuses but there are only so many of them. Unless they hire a small army of people for sales and support, I don't see them going into the very-high-volume market right now?

But hey, if anyone would know how to do it, it'd be Jim and co, right?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Domain name registrations are cheap. Scarlet2k.com could be a ruse, a diversion, a Red Herring.God help you dude. . . .

It's a 2K camera!!! Shout it from the hills! Do you need to see it in skywriting?

IBloomMaybe it is a 2K camera. But there has been no official word yet. On another forum, someone (here (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=806335&postcount=174)) tried to submit the "Scarlet 2K" trademark application as proof of Scarlet's resolution. Jim Jannard responded (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=806338&postcount=175), "Good find... but remember, things 'can change at any time'. And often do." My point? Don't assume anything.

[Joseph Hutson]

Jim Jannard responded (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=806338&postcount=175), "Good find... but remember, things 'can change at any time'. And often do." My point? Don't assume anything.

Do you EVER think thigs can change for the BETTER?!?

[Bruce Allen]

Sorry, Orbitluster, missed your post.

Sorry if this response is OT everyone - but in the absence of more cool Scarlet news this is what we're reduced to ;)


I see. So as long as you throw enough light at it and maybe under expose a 1/2 stop to protect for high lights you should be fine(?).

Yes. For this one I actually didn't use my light meter. We just connected the HV20 up to my monitor and kept an eye out for noise on one end and highlight clipping on the other while tweaking the lighting.

Actually the most challenging part of the shoot was getting the footballs to turn evenly on the modified chicken rotisserie setup that Jake York invented. They were slippery and we weren't allowed to use glue ;)



But how about all the consumer functions and controls? How much of a hassle is to work around that?


They ARE a pain and drive most people nuts. I you are a patient type you'll be fine though, I think. My philosophy is to keep things simple:

1. if you want creative control over aperture and focus, use a 35mm adapter. Treat the HV20's controls as simply "choosing your film stock".
2. if you just to capture crisp, deep focus stuff, take the adapter off, set the exposure right and go...



Could you see yourself for example shooting a whole movie with it?


Probably not, unless it was a street theatre / dogme / documentary thing... or very experimental.

For the amount of work that goes into shooting a feature, you might as well use a better camera. I think you could definitely use the HV20 to shoot the pitch for your feature though... or the short film or crazy creative music video that gets you closer to discovering / proving you have an artistic voice and which leads up to a feature (with a lot of luck ;)...

It is wonderfully mobile though - even with 35mm adapter it feels like a little film camera. Definitely more mobile than that old 16mm Arri I'm holding in my avatar photo (especially when you consider the leaden battery belt!



Well since those lights will last you forever and will never really be obsolete and the HV20 will be yesterday news in a couple of years, investing more on lighting always made more sense to me.
Me too... keeping an eye on LED though.



Great job! It looks extremely sharp. But it's an extreme close up too. Most cameras would look sharp. But it looks great nonetheless.
Thanks!



I'm thinking it was shot straight without a 35mm adapter?
Yes. I brought an adapter but decided not to use it.



If the HV20 is as light hungry as you say I imagine a 35mm adapter would make it nearly impossible to shoot indoors or at night. Also the great sharpness you got would be substantially reduced by the ground glass.

Yes, it's difficult and yes, you take a hit in sharpness. Indoors is not totally impossible though. Here's a test my friend Matt and I did:
http://www.boacinema.com/projects/camera_tests/hv20/hv20_17_35_28_rack_test_cc_h264.mov
Key is just a 400w Kino Diva-lite on the left. There's fill coming in from a window behind us.



By the way, what format was the film shot with?


35mm spherical. Sanjin posted that it was a Panavision Millenium camera with Primo L lenses.



Yes. The EX1 is an impressive camera. It's the closest to F900 quality we ever been in the sub 10K category. I actually think it would be hard to tell them apart on the big screen if shot properly. But I heard about some lens problems and other quirks that are turning people off.

Yes, have heard similar rumors, also RE vignetting etc. Some rumors say they were only with the inital run? My friend just shot a music vid and noticed some vignetting too. Ah well, haven't had the time to play yet...

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Do you EVER think thigs can change for the BETTER?!?With Red, as with most digital technology, things have generally changed for the better. But I didn't state categorically that Scarlet, based on Jannard's reply, would have a resolution greater than 2K. It could be 1080p. However, he's a smart guy and must know that because his reply has the tone of a verbal wink, if the Scarlet's top resolution changes to less than 2K, he'll disappoint a lot of people. What the Red team have achieved with the Red One is remarkable. I doubt that they want to underwhelm potential customers. Therefore, within a set of already stated parameters -- Scarlet will be smaller than One, it won't compete with One (will have somewhat lower specifications than One's), yet it will be professional (i.e., will have durable construction and features that professionals expect) -- Scarlet is, I'm sure, intended to knock your socks off. So I think it safe to say that Jim Jannard meant that Scarlet might be 2K or it might be greater than 2K.

[Ameer Azari]

Yay 2k!!

[Joseph Hutson]

-- Scarlet is, I'm sure, intended to knock your socks off. So I think it safe to say that Jim Jannard meant that Scarlet might be 2K or it might be greater than 2K.

3K? :-) I know, we would probably be asking a LITTLE too much for that.

[killfilm]

With Red, as with most digital technology, things have generally changed for the better. But I didn't state categorically that Scarlet, based on Jannard's reply, would have a resolution greater than 2K. It could be 1080p. However, he's a smart guy and must know that because his reply has the tone of a verbal wink, if the Scarlet's top resolution changes to less than 2K, he'll disappoint a lot of people. What the Red team have achieved with the Red One is remarkable. I doubt that they want to underwhelm potential customers. Therefore, within a set of already stated parameters -- Scarlet will be smaller than One, it won't compete with One (will have somewhat lower specifications than One's), yet it will be professional (i.e., will have durable construction and features that professionals expect) -- Scarlet is, I'm sure, intended to knock your socks off. So I think it safe to say that Jim Jannard meant that Scarlet might be 2K or it might be greater than 2K.

Its stated clearly that the scarlet will NOT compete with Red, so i think 4k would be a stretch, but Jim can surprise us again, 4k minus interchangable lenses wouldnt compete with the red.

P.S. Please Jim, make the scarlet upgradable like the Red one. Then users can pay down the line to upgrade to options like 4k.

[Joseph Hutson]

P.S. Please Jim, make the scarlet upgradable like the Red one. Then users can pay down the line to upgrade to options like 4k.

I second that for hundreds of others.

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Its stated clearly that the scarlet will NOT compete with Red, so i think 4k would be a stretch, but Jim can surprise us again, 4k minus interchangable lenses wouldnt compete with the red.Given how big a 4K imager would have to be to have low noise and sufficient light sensitivity, I think it unlikely that Scarlet, with a noninterchangeable zoom lens, could be called a pocket camera. If the lens couldn't be changed, it would need an adequate range (say, 10 to 1). Sure, there are plenty of still digicams of greater-than-4K resolution, but their zooms are pretty limited. And Jim has gone out of his way to reemphasize both "pocket" and "professional."