hvx vs scarlet

[Steve Laramie]

I know the scarlet hasnt come out yet but would the scarlet be an upgrade from the HVX. I just cant beleive its only 3grand.

[dantewaters]

I know the scarlet hasnt come out yet but would the scarlet be an upgrade from the HVX. I just cant beleive its only 3grand.

3k is the base price... factor around 5k-6k in the end.

[Steve Laramie]

thats what I thought.... what would you NEED to buy to make it work? I thought they were trying to make it an out of the box camera.

[Shane Ross]

It is too early to tell...they keep changing what the camera body will look like. If the workflow is anything like the current RED camera, it is anything but "out of the box." It is still currently vaporware until a model comes out.

[Joseph Stunzi]

Well personally from my POV... it's too early to tell what sort of investment and quality can be expected out of the RED Scarlet

[Mattykins]

I think this Red revolution is entirely over-rated. No one knows what Scarlet will actually be. I think people just need to wait. I mean, if it works out that way - cool. But how far does resolution actually go?

[Alex.Mitchell]

I think this Red revolution is entirely over-rated.

It seems like it, right up until you have an opportunity to work with the footage. I'd recommend using a ONE or trying out the workflow before coming to that conclusion.

But yeah, everyone pretty much has it right. There isn't a camera from RED today that you can compare the HVX to, and the spec sheet doesn't reveal much. Judging from what we do know, the HVX and Scarlet are two entirely different cameras with two entirely different workflows that are suited to two different markets.

If you're interested in finding out more, just go check out scarletuser.com or reduser.net. Download some footage, try making a workflow for it, read some specs, etc. It'll give you a much more balanced perspective on the pros and cons of a transition to RED gear than any of us could.

[TimurCivan]

An hvx200 exists, and you can edit its footage on a 5 year old computer....

Scarlet... who knows.....

[Alex.Mitchell]

Scarlet... who knows.....

Actually, the footage from Scarlet and the footage from the Red One are indistinguishable to your computer. Technically, everyone that knows what it's like working with 3K Redcode knows what it is going to be like working with Scarlet footage.

Truth be told, unless you're running on a PPC Mac it's not going to be any more processor intensive to edit Scarlet footage than HVX footage, depending on what your deliverables and preferred workflow are going to be. For me, I'm planning around an offline edit with a quarter debayer to ProRes 422 SQ, with an online using a full debayer scaled to 2k ProRes 422 HQ. However, a half debayer to DVCProHD 720p is more than doable, and would look pretty fantastic while remaining easy on the processors. The difference is that you can't really run RedRushes, RedAlert, or RedCine on a PPC Mac, so converting Redcode to DVCPro would need to be done on someone else's machine if you've got a five year old editing station.

[CherryTime]

It's very hyped for sure!

[mrbrycel]

even if it's $3,000, wont you need to buy all the red accessories? If i had to guess, you'd end up paying MORE than an HVX200a

[Steve Laramie]

its supposed to come with an 8x lens and a 4.5in high rez monitor.

[Mattykins]

It seems like it, right up until you have an opportunity to work with the footage. I'd recommend using a ONE or trying out the workflow before coming to that conclusion.


I've seen the footage. I haven't worked with the camera yet. But I don't really have anything slated I need a RED for. I guess what I am saying is so many people love the huge resolution. If it was all resolution - everything would be shot on a RED. Resolution only goes so far. That's my opinion on it anyways. I use the camera that gets the job done. Digital cinema wise - I am content with CineAlta. Though much more expensive - I love the cameras and the workflow.

[Mac]

I viewed some footage shot with the ONE and thought it looked pretty amazing - like looking at a scene through a very clean window...

However, I don't like films that look like a scene through a window... For over a century cinematographers have worked - using lighting, diffusion and laboratory manipulation - to create images that are subjective, not objective - because filmmaking is a subjective art.

That's not to say that it isn't possible to do that with the Red as well... But it does take considerable experience and visual skill, just like shooting 35mm... Don't expect to just pick one up and shoot footage that looks like JESSE JAMES.

The last thing I want is for someone to look at a film I've made and only say "Gee, that's really sharp, isn't it?".

Realistically, the Red's image is over-kill for the majority of people. In most cases, no audience will ever see anything in the end result that represents the capabilities of the camera - even on BlueRay when that becomes feasible. If you want to have the best possible image for your own experimentation, or to be able to tell people you have it, fine, but otherwise the Panasonics are better than good enough.

[Chris Santucci]

Realistically, the Red's image is over-kill for the majority of people. In most cases, no audience will ever see anything in the end result that represents the capabilities of the camera - even on BlueRay when that becomes feasible. If you want to have the best possible image for your own experimentation, or to be able to tell people you have it, fine, but otherwise the Panasonics are better than good enough.


Red: It's a camera, not a revolution.

Is it worth the hassle in post (not to mention on shoot days) if your end product only ends up on television sets or computer monitors? When HD became a reality, producers were looking for DPs who could shoot HD, now they're looking for DPs who can shoot with a Red.

HD, Red - it's still "video." It's not like Red is such a radical departure that you need a different set of skills (well, maybe thermodynamics) to use it and it's not giving you significantly better footage as far as I can tell.

I've seen lots of Red projects (on small screens) and they don't look radically different from anything shot on a Cinealta, Varicam, HVX200, etc. I worked on a commercial job recently that was shot on the Panavision F900 and was shown on theatre screens all over the country as a filmout. I don't remember hearing one person say it was nice, but, it would have been better if it were shot on the Red.

.

[wgzn]

i know aliens havent landed on earth yet. but when they do, will their transportation technology help get gas back to under $2.00 a gallon?

[Steve Laramie]

no but they probably have 1tb p2 cards for $100

[ProfessorU]

HD, Red - it's still "video." It's not like Red is such a radical departure that you need a different set of skills (well, maybe thermodynamics) to use it and it's not giving you significantly better footage as far as I can tell.

The RED One is a digital cinema camera (not a video camera). Regardless of resolution, there are multiple other differences. Digital cinema cameras like the D-21, Viper, and RED One are not great tools to use to put together a talk show, just like Betacams are not great tools for a feature film.

I advise anyone working on RED One to treat it like a film camera. Use a light meter, sync sound, etc. It's much more like shooting on reversal than on tape, especially with the workflow complications that plague anyone without a post-production house or their own programmer.

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of similarities between the two formats, but there are also a lot of similarities between TV and still photography.

[wgzn]

The RED One is a digital cinema camera (not a video camera). Regardless of resolution, there are multiple other differences. Digital cinema cameras like the D-21, Viper, and RED One are not great tools to use to put together a talk show, just like Betacams are not great tools for a feature film.

i hear this kind of thing a lot. and find it a tad confusing... are red video files not synced with the audio files? is what you see on your monitor NOT what you see when you capture the footage?
other than a more complicated injest workflow, what (outside of learning the specific camera controls) makes the red so much different than say an HVX with a 35mm adapter?

im sure my ignorant viewpoint will change once i USE a red, but - compose, light, expose(record), capture, edit. does the red really challenge the shooting paradigm that much?

[puredrifting]

I think that they are alluding to that the Red ONE has medicore audio quality at this point although there is a free audio board swap out available. Have not heard from any RED users yet on the differences between the old board and new board but Sound Devices does have a blurb on their website discussing relative audio quality of the Red ONE. They recommend double system sound (of course, they make all of those sweet audio recorders as well).

Dan

[Chris Santucci]

The RED One is a digital cinema camera (not a video camera).

Well... that's a term that Red coined (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=digital+cinema+camera&btnG=Google+Search) as far as I can tell. But as far as I'm concerned, it's still digital video. I mean, really, how different is it in terms of the format? Red can call it whatever they want, but in the end it's using an imaging sensor like all the other video cameras. It might be a big CMOS sensor and it might have a fancy name, but it's still a sensor.



Regardless of resolution, there are multiple other differences. Digital cinema cameras like the D-21, Viper, and RED One are not great tools to use to put together a talk show, just like Betacams are not great tools for a feature film.

Still video.



I advise anyone working on RED One to treat it like a film camera. Use a light meter, sync sound, etc. It's much more like shooting on reversal than on tape, especially with the workflow complications that plague anyone without a post-production house or their own programmer.

Errrr, reversal has like a 4 stop range. My understanding is that Red definitely has greater dynamic range than that.

.

[Mattykins]

Digital Cinema cameras came to use with the advent of the panavised F900. When Starwars was shot with it. That was the advent of "digital cinema" cameras really.

[ProfessorU]

We shot with the RED One to RedCode RAW format, and when we applied LUTs to the files as a QT file using RED software, the audio was not included. This is a known issue with RED software and I'm sure it's something they intend to fix (if they haven't already). It was very frustrating on set because a true image preview is not possible with sound. I believe that is why they suggest using external sync sound, because unless you have a high-end digital postproduction house, your workflow options are pretty limited. Add that to the issues of Mac gamma, and RED using a different gamma for different software, and LUTs in FCP, and it's a DITs nightmare.

Because you're capturing in RAW, you can make more significant adjustments to the final output without the drawbacks of video gain, just like a best-light film transfer.

I think the Red's latitude was adequate, but it's nowhere near, say, Vision2 stock. I was making more of a generalization that in terms of latitude, the RED ends up between a nice digibeta cam and color negative. Suggested lighting ratios for reversal are usually 2:1 or 3:1, a good place to start with the RED One.

Looking at Kodak Ektachrome 100D as an example:http://www.kodak.com/global/images/en/motion/products/reversal/85sensi.gif

You might have four stops of color reversal film latitude, but you also have quite a bit of room in the toe and shoulder. The RED exposes linearly, but chances are you're going to want to output with a LUT that ends up looking much like this curve (assuming you exposed correctly)... and your final results will be similar to having shot on reversal.

A single person can shoot a great news package on the HVX200 in 45 minutes. I don't see anyone doing that with a RED. Sure, you can call it video, but it's obviously a different animal than a HD video camera, because it has made changes to the workflow that make it significantly more difficult to use for conventional video applications.

[Erik Olson]

Double-system sound isn't exactly new for film production. Or digital cinema production for that matter. Docu and reality and the rest... that's a different story. But those guys aren't going to be messing with LUTs on-set either.

e

[Mac]

The original question was "is the Scarlet an upgrade compared to the HVX?"... And the answer has gotten lost in the mix. Personally, I don't think it is because of the (current) production hassles elaborated above...

I shot double system sound for most of my professional career (on documentaries as a matter of fact) and over time perfected on-the-fly syncing techniques that aren't too intimidating, but they do take some getting used to - from the soundman tapping the mike to an electronic clapper to a digital slate, they all involve an added step that won't come naturally to a person who's only shot video. I still occasionally use a Tascam so I don't have to depend on wireless, but I do sometimes forget to tail-slate before stopping the camera even after all this time.

The post production hassles, which I haven't personally experienced, are more of a concern. I think the Scarlet is a great camera for a hobbiest - someone who wants to push the envelope and has the time to tinker with the post-production work flow. That will be great for those of us who read these forums, because that's one of the ways we learn new things.

But right now, I don't think it's a good choice for a filmmaker.

[Jaimebailon]

i would never record any audio straight to camera that just spells disaster being that audio is probably the second most important thing in your project

[DC]

I dig Red and think it's cool. I've got to applaud the company for what they've accomplished.

That being said, I think a lot of producers are shooting Red based on hype - that the name "Red" will help sell their product, even if the end (visual) results are irrelevant (i.e. shooting on Red when the delivery is web-based, etc.). And maybe that's true, that the name is driving profit.

I have a friend who has been losing jobs to Red (that his HPX500 used to go out to). And he's being told by people that the Red name is driving the rentals. So, being sick of hearing that, he went and ordered himself a Red package.

For myself, I don't have the $30k-$60k to invest into Red. I'm perfectly happy with P2HD and so are most of my clients. If I ever have a demand for Red from a client, I'll just rent a Red package from my friend. And maybe someday, I'll even buy one. But for now, I'm all good . . .

[Mac]

i would never record any audio straight to camera that just spells disaster being that audio is probably the second most important thing in your project

Well, although a dyed-in-the-wool film person, I shoot documentaries now exclusively with the HPX500/HVX200 combo and record about 90% of my audio in camera. I originally bought the Tascam when I was shooting with an XL H1, and didn't like the HDV audio. Now, as I said, I primarily use the Tascam when I think there might be an interference issue with wireless.

I've shot way over 100 hours in the last year on P2 cards and have not had a single problem with the audio... My soundman uses a 416 on a pole and sends me a wireless signal from a Shure mixer. With the 500, I can easily monitor a single track and dial in the level with the convenient knob that's positioned at the front of the camera (whoops, HPX500 is another thread - but I do a version of that with the 200 too).

But this is getting away from the original question again - If you've got an HVX200, I'd recommend keeping it until the Scarlet has been on the market for at least a year... It's a damn good little camera - 200a's even better of course...

[Rippie]

I've shot way over 100 hours in the last year on P2 cards and have not had a single problem with the audio... .

define "problem"?

The 200 does sound decent as far as small format cameras go, but its far
from great. It's noisy (s/n) and far too much low end gets rolled off.
That being said, I've done 2 small indie features running single system (direct into the cam) and the result wasnt terrible, but I've also done a few indies using the 200, and using my Sound devices 744T (since sold for my 788T) and well
its not even a comparison in quality. The difference is like a clean lens and a lens
thats covered in dirt.

[cheezweezl]

i don't know how the scarlet will be but i can tell you first hand that the red one is far from a video cam. to me it is best described as a digital SLR that shoots 24 frames per second. sure it records audio and all that but the frames are like the digital stills i take with my nikon. the dynamic range is far beyond video and each frame stands on it's own like film does.

i would suspect that scarlet will be similar to the red one. the biggest difference being that it's 3k instead of 4k and assuming that the sensor will be smaller, the DOF will be relatively deeper.

as far as workflow goes, red footage is more complicated to deal with than any kind of video but despite the rumors, it's actually fairly simple and as far as i've experienced, pretty solid.

can the average viewer tell the difference between red and hvx? absolutely.

will it make or break your film? not a chance.

[Chris Santucci]

I think the Red's latitude was adequate, but it's nowhere near, say, Vision2 stock. I was making more of a generalization that in terms of latitude, the RED ends up between a nice digibeta cam and color negative. Suggested lighting ratios for reversal are usually 2:1 or 3:1, a good place to start with the RED One.



I hear Red users are saying the dynamic range is closer to 8 stops than (I think) the 10 stops they claim.

.

[Mac]

define "problem"?

By problem, I mean no loss of audio, sync issues or glitches. Remember, I shoot documentaries, usually in less than ideal working conditions. There is some S/N with the 200, true (not as bad on the 500), but it's not that objectionable after years of using analog reel-to-reel - and the loss of low end is usually an asset when recording in a situation where cars and airplanes are in the background. I don't record music.

That said, I would also opt for double system if it was more practical.. what makes it impractical is the less-than-intuitive usability of most digital audio recorders. Over the years I've owned everything from a Uher to a Nagra IV to a PortaDat, all of which are clearly, visually running, either because of actual tape transport or large clear TC displays.

With the Tascam (and other affordable units I've tested) it is possible to think you're running when you're not, especially when working fast - THAT is a huge problem... I wish that these recorders had a large visual display that either showed TC or a simple graphically displayed turning wheel that confirmed the machine is in fact recording sound. This may sound silly to some, but all it takes is one time and you'll know what I mean.

This belabored discussion belongs in another forum though.

[Rippie]

you might be into the new 788t then if its in your budget.
They added a backlight redlight to the record button..but bigger
the entire display turns red when recording, and turns green on playback
but you're right this belongs elsewhere.


By problem, I mean no loss of audio, sync issues or glitches. Remember, I shoot documentaries, usually in less than ideal working conditions. There is some S/N with the 200, true (not as bad on the 500), but it's not that objectionable after years of using analog reel-to-reel - and the loss of low end is usually an asset when recording in a situation where cars and airplanes are in the background. I don't record music.

That said, I would also opt for double system if it was more practical.. what makes it impractical is the less-than-intuitive usability of most digital audio recorders. Over the years I've owned everything from a Uher to a Nagra IV to a PortaDat, all of which are clearly, visually running, either because of actual tape transport or large clear TC displays.

With the Tascam (and other affordable units I've tested) it is possible to think you're running when you're not, especially when working fast - THAT is a huge problem... I wish that these recorders had a large visual display that either showed TC or a simple graphically displayed turning wheel that confirmed the machine is in fact recording sound. This may sound silly to some, but all it takes is one time and you'll know what I mean.

This belabored discussion belongs in another forum though.

[OUinLA]

Scarlet will have more dynamic range than the Red One and will have more resolution than an F23. I'd call that an upgrade from the HVX. Don't get me wrong, I love my HVX, but how could anyone not see the Scarlet as an upgrade?

I cut my teeth in the film world. 95% of my career was in Hollywood doing features, Episodic, and commercials. I never wanted to switch to video and never believed video would look like film in my lifetime. The Red One is damn close though. The resolution is enough that it feels like film, the depth of field is a match and the color rendition is amazing. Call it video, call it digital cinema...It's not film but it looks just like it.

For the Scarlet: almost all post production houses/studios scan film at 2k resolution for their digital post work. The Scarlet will be slightly higher than 2k but will have a slightly smaller chip than the Red, so it won't look quite the same. However, expect the improved dynamic range along with the color rendition to be enough to give any non 4 or 5K camera a run for its money.

[Justyn]

The one thing that is a bit of a concern is that Red one is under no real authority and or corporate structure in traditional terms. They openly say that things will, can and should change. That dates are relative and arbitrary. So, if getting a Scarlet turns into the biggest thing ever, how long will it take to get one when 25,000 people want one and they are putting out maybe a few hundred for months and months.


I believe that it's their ability to hype, keep things in the way distant future, and then deliver half-backed products and expect people to live with things till they get on top of the technology. Not saying the stuff doesn't look darn badass, but there's known problems with the camera not giving 100 percent of its features at pro levels, with the audio and some of the other elements.


For me.. that's the biggest thing. The HVX came out when it was supposed to, with no real technical glitches, delivering more than we thought. Does Red do the same?

[puredrifting]

The one thing that is a bit of a concern is that Red one is under no real authority and or corporate structure in traditional terms. They openly say that things will, can and should change. That dates are relative and arbitrary. So, if getting a Scarlet turns into the biggest thing ever, how long will it take to get one when 25,000 people want one and they are putting out maybe a few hundred for months and months.


I believe that it's their ability to hype, keep things in the way distant future, and then deliver half-backed products and expect people to live with things till they get on top of the technology. Not saying the stuff doesn't look darn badass, but there's known problems with the camera not giving 100 percent of its features at pro levels, with the audio and some of the other elements.


For me.. that's the biggest thing. The HVX came out when it was supposed to, with no real technical glitches, delivering more than we thought. Does Red do the same?

Justyn:

Best post in this thread, you make very astute observations. I agree with you totally.

Dan

[Mattykins]

I am shooting with a RED now. And it's beautiful image wise. However she is a finicky beast. Has a tendency of freezing up on us despite new firmware. She doesn't like playback, and she doesn't like long takes. We have had a few internal fault errors - whatever that means.

But aside from those glitches, it is a nice camera. The F23, though less resolution wise - is still a killer camera. It will blow an HVX out of the water. With Digiprimes - an F23 and a Scarlet are not even near the same league. As a note.

[zacuto]

It's all about the shooter and not the camera. If you are a good shooter and know how to make your sing; I've seen amazing stuff from RED and I've seen crap. Same with the HVX200. It's all about the people, experience and knowing how to light.

[Justyn]

Justyn:

Best post in this thread, you make very astute observations. I agree with you totally.

Dan



Cheers for that. I am trying to see things in terms of what they are instead of relying on relativeness... something I've been studying a bit lately. We are humans though, and relative opinions are kind of how we deal with the world.. or some BS like that.

[Luis Caffesse]

Funny, when the HVX was released I remember a lot of people complaining about it's release being late... the word 'vaporware' was even thrown around here and there... even though technically Panasonic started shipping it within their timeframe (4th QTR 2005).

You do bring up some very valid points Justyn, not saying you aren't.
On the other hand - big companies get a lot of the same gripes about hitting timelines, so RED isn't totally alone in that.

All issues aside, I am shocked as to how much penetration the RED One seems to have in such a short time frame.
They seem to be doing something right - and I can't think it's just the marketing.

Though clearly they are masters of that.

[Justyn]

Luis. Very true. I think they are masters at marketing.. but they also have been delivering to people that can afford it and that, and soon it will be to people who previously were in the dvxuser price range.. WOW indeed.

[OUinLA]

The one thing that is a bit of a concern is that Red one is under no real authority and or corporate structure in traditional terms. They openly say that things will, can and should change. That dates are relative and arbitrary. So, if getting a Scarlet turns into the biggest thing ever, how long will it take to get one when 25,000 people want one and they are putting out maybe a few hundred for months and months.


I believe that it's their ability to hype, keep things in the way distant future, and then deliver half-backed products and expect people to live with things till they get on top of the technology. Not saying the stuff doesn't look darn badass, but there's known problems with the camera not giving 100 percent of its features at pro levels, with the audio and some of the other elements.


For me.. that's the biggest thing. The HVX came out when it was supposed to, with no real technical glitches, delivering more than we thought. Does Red do the same?

Red has only released one camera so far so who knows how the release will go for Scarlet and Epic. The line about things can and will change, count on it, is a positive in my mind. Some of the features people were expecting with Scarlet have actually been improved from their initial announcement. Not many people are going to complain about a free upgrade.

As for getting a Scarlet when the waiting line is much larger than the Red One...Scarlet is being produced differently. Most likely the whole thing won't be produced and assembled in their offices. It will be produced more like the other video cameras (Sony, Pana, Canon, etc) that meet the demands of the consumers. Red One is a different case and shouldn't be compared to the Scarlet, yet.

What Red has offered their Red One owners goes way beyond what other camera manufacturers are doing. I've never seen any other maker offer the kind of support that the Red team does, it's not even close. I'll take that over the cheezy HVX warranty I got that didn't even cover dust in the lens (known issue with camera).

Not to mention, i'll get a camera with a longer and better lens, more resolution and won't get ripped off on P2 cards, all for less than what I paid for my HVX.

[Dan Vance]

All issues aside, I am shocked as to how much penetration the RED One seems to have in such a short time frame.



Short? It's been 3 YEARS. The DVX100 had more penetration in 6 months, likewise the HVX. That's the downside of hyping a product long before it's been designed.

[Luis Caffesse]

Short? It's been 3 YEARS. The DVX100 had more penetration in 6 months, likewise the HVX. That's the downside of hyping a product long before it's been designed.

I don't think it's fair to compare the RED One penetration to that of the DVX or the HVX.
Completley different markets, and different users.
No one bought a RED One in lieu of a DVX or HVX.

The RED One should be compared to the cameras it was slated to compete against - namely the higher end of the HD market. People who bought the RED One are using it instead of something like the Sony F950, or even the Viper. The number of those cameras out there is much smaller than anything intended for a mass consumer base like the DVX or HVX.

On top of that add in the fact that this was a new company with zero track record.
Given those factors, I find it rather impressive that they've shipped as many units as they have in such a short time frame.

I know of more RED One's available for rent near me than I do of Sony F950s.
And honestly, I don't know where I'd go near me to rent a Viper.

I spoke to a friend in Hawaii recently who told me she'd been shooting commercials there on the RED - she said she knew of 8 units out there for rent from various sources. I thought was rather tellng.

And to be clear - it's been three years since RED was founded (2005)
They announced the RED One at Nab of 2006.
They shipped the first units at the end of August of 2007.

So it's been about a year since the camera has been available and in use.
So yeah, I think the way they've penetrated the marketplace in that timeframe to be impressive.

[pdsage10]

I don't think it's fair to compare the RED One penetration to that of the DVX or the HVX.


Exactly. Any soccer mom, film student or wedding videographer can afford a DVX, but not a RED. Trying to compare the penetration of RED and the DVX/HVX is like comparing the penetration of the Honda Accord to the Cadillac STS.

[Dan Vance]

I don't think it's fair to compare the RED One penetration to that of the DVX or the HVX.
Completley different markets, and different users.
No one bought a RED One in lieu of a DVX or HVX.



Don't confuse "penetration" with "number of units." DVX100 and HVX had significant market penetration in THEIR MARKET in 6 months. "Their market" is obviously a much bigger one. RED now has comparable market penetration in their market--but it took a lot longer.


And honestly, I don't know where I'd go near me to rent a Viper.

What's a Viper...?
:)



And to be clear - it's been three years since RED was founded (2005)
They announced the RED One at Nab of 2006.
They shipped the first units at the end of August of 2007.


Now, come on, let's take some of the spin off that. It's been 3 years since RED was announced--what it would be. It's not like Jim started the company in 2005 and then sat around for a year going, hmm, what should we make...?

And according to what I've read, the first units shipped were all but unusable, and apparently even the current iteration still has serious issues.



So yeah, I think the way they've penetrated the marketplace in that timeframe to be impressive.

I AM impressed that they have such a strong following for a product that is essentially stiil in the prototype stage. Someday it will be a nice setup. Probably not this year.

[Luis Caffesse]

Don't confuse "penetration" with "number of units." DVX100 and HVX had significant market penetration in THEIR MARKET in 6 months. "Their market" is obviously a much bigger one. RED now has comparable market penetration in their market--but it took a lot longer.

Fair enough - so given that it's been a year since cameras were released RED has taken twice as long (by your numbers of 6 months, which I assume as a best guess) as established companies with a long history of marketing and brand awareness.

Still sounds impressive to me.


What's a Viper...?
:)

Exactly.


Now, come on, let's take some of the spin off that. It's been 3 years since RED was announced--what it would be. It's not like Jim started the company in 2005 and then sat around for a year going, hmm, what should we make...?

If you're going to use that logic then there is no way the HVX had this huge market penetration you're talking about in 6 months time. The HVX was officially announced at NAB Apr 17, 2005. It was hinted at (and marketing began) even earlier than that.
It was released at the end of December in 2005, 8 months later. So which dates are we going by, announcement or release?


And according to what I've read, the first units shipped were all but unusable, and apparently even the current iteration still has serious issues.

And all I said was that I was impressed with the amount of market penetration they've gotten in such a short timeframe. I still think it's significant and I still think it's impressive. I never said anything about being impressed with a lack of issues.


I AM impressed that they have such a strong following for a product that is essentially stiil in the prototype stage. Someday it will be a nice setup. Probably not this year.

Whether or not it's 'ready for primetime' is another issue entirely to me.
But I don't think anyone can deny that they've had an impact on the industry.

EDITED TO ADD:
For the record, Dan is just trying to rile me up.
:)

[Mattykins]

What's a Viper...?
:)


And according to what I've read, the first units shipped were all but unusable, and apparently even the current iteration still has serious issues.



The Viper Cam is a 35mm format digital cinema camera. But I assume you were being sarcastic.

And now, I just got off set with a RED. The issues weren't as serious as you might read. We dropped one clip due to an internal fault. Though playback wasn't happening. She would crash when we tried to playback. Not problems that would steer me away from the red.

[Eagle-I]

How will a Scarlet perform in real world situations with no external hardware ? I mean in terms of the fact that it uses a single Compact Flash type card to record on - How much compression artifacts does it display versus P2. How does this compare to the P2 technology that uses a high-bitrate mini-raid array in the card ? Whats MR Greens take on this ?
Has anyone compared the Redcode codec to a DVCPro-HD codec in terms of final quality. I am interested in these camera for a remote apllication, so far the HPX-170 fits the bill perfectly.

[Barry_Green]

My take is like it always is -- we have to test it to see. I am very optimistic about the Scarlet. I was one of the original Red One owners, one of the first 400, and while the product at the time was not ready for prime time, it certainly delivered gorgeous imagery. Windows workflow and other issues led me to sell it, but once it's all sussed out I will probably get another one.

When Scarlet is a product, rather than a concept, I'll be thrilled to evaluate it for all potential uses. I plan on getting one. Whether it would replace an HPX170 or an HPX500 or an EX1 or something like that, I'm not so sure. But for $3,000 it's hard to see how one could go wrong. 180 fps, with 2K resolution, even if you only got it for special effects it'd still be a screaming deal.

[ProfessorU]

On paper, REDCode RAW blows DVCProHD out of the water in all areas except usability and file size. They are so fundamentally different that a comparison (other than a visual one) is unlikely.

[Eagle-I]

According to what Ive read on the red site REDCode RAW cannot be recorded to the on-camera CF card. It is too much for the card to swallow. It can only be recorded to an external high-speed device (Flash array, HD array etc). For the REDONE cam, REDcode28 (at 25fps max) is all they show as an option for on-cam recording to single CF card. This is for the RED One, but could it be assumed the Scarlet would be similar ? maybe more frame rates given the smaller sensor. I could easily be wrong on that since im a codec newbie.

[TheMusician]

You are a little off Eagle-I. If you want to record plain old RAW, then yes, you need a Raid setup to ingest it. If you want to shoot "Redcode" RAW, this is a proprietary format that has been optimized(mildly compressed) to be able to work with Compact Flash at multiple frame rates. This is how I understand it.

[kyle_doris]

i think i'd rather have a Scarlet than my HVX... they have very different features though, it's the case of two separate feature-sets. i even see this with the difference between the HVX and the HPX - and they have the same sensor.

i'd sacrafice a little bit of workflow time for 3k RAW on compact flash cards with FW800 out and a variety of other things that wouldn't be availible elsewhere.

the only thing with the scarlet is that i'm not holding my breath, when it comes it comes. until then, there are plenty of cameras (HPX170!) out there that are perfectly suited for for anything i'd do.

[lawriejaffa]

Meh, its just so much hype though isnt it - about the scarlet? It's like Barry said with his red, he got it, loved it, but ultimately had to sell it (work flow difficulties etc.)

So I mean the Scarlet has incredible sounding features, but im utterly and completely unconvinced that any remotely meaningful comparisons can be made, because not only does it not exist, but we have the evidence of those difficulties the Red has had on its release.

Scarlet is supposed to have an easy workflow for soccer mom apparently, but if it can deliver all that, at a modest price, then that would be sensational. I think if the Red operation was all cool, if there cams were utterly stable (or more) then id be less dubious about the Scarlet! But i do want it to succeed cos it sounds amazing!

[TheMusician]

Amen to that Kyle. There are a lot of good cameras available right now.

One thing that I seem to think everyone forgets is that Jim Janaard is hoping to not only sell these to professionals, but to "soccer moms" as he stated over on ScarletUser. If that is truly the case, I would not be surprised at all if they offered an in-camera downconvert to 1080p from the available 3K, which would aleviate most of the post-headaches. Just a thought.

[Justyn]

I didn't know Barry bought a Red and returned it. Was were the reasons? link to Barry's info?

[Barry_Green]

I didn't return it, I held on to it for about three months trying to figure a way to make it work, before ultimately deciding that it just wasn't ready (I was a very early reservation holder, #364, and things were different then). Plus, even though I worked the scene here to drum up jobs, the demand just wasn't there (outside of a some successful owner/ops in L.A.). Demand is a lot stronger now of course.

The image was shockingly delicious (and this is back on Build 13 & 14, before they upgraded to Build 16 and all the improvements that came with that!) But at the time the workflow was impossible for anyone but a Mac/FCP user, and even then it was far from ideal, and -- well, heck, even today, late-August, last I checked they still don't have what I would consider a functional Windows workflow for professional production yet (unless you want to spend $30,000 - $50,000 for an Assimilate Scratch system, which made no sense to me from a business perspective). Adobe support has been talked about, but has yet to materialize as far as I know.

For me it was all about a business decision. I got it, I loved the image, I hated the workflow compromises I was being asked to make (an hour to render a minute's footage before I could work with it? Not practical). So I was able to sell it and its lens for enough to profit enough to put both my daughters through college this year, which was a no-brainer. I decided that I would revisit the Red One when the workflow is totally sorted out, Red lenses are more available, and it's ready to really be put to work. And if the used market starts to bring the prices down (especially if there's sales pressure put on by the Red One owners who overextended themselves to buy a Red One but who would be better served by a Scarlet.)

That said, I understand that there are people working with it every day and that they're making it work. I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm saying that I was not willing to put up with the compromises it asked for, at the time, and in the state it was in at that time. I trust that by the time Scarlet is out this will all be sorted out and I'll be getting at least a Scarlet if not another Red One (on the used market though).

[Kenneth]

We talk about resolution, but it's the cinematographer, with his/her bag of tricks (lights, cranes, dollys, scrims, etc.) that make an image. Photography is just the recording of light bouncing off stuff.

So, sure, the new Red cameras are allgreat at capturing detail, but what is that detail made of? And would a night scene shot in the fog just look better shot on 16mm b&w film for the grain it adds and the mood it sets?

I would bet a cinematographer could do better with an HVX, the $3k for the Scarlet spent on lighitng equipment, and the $3k in camera periferals needed spent on some lighting classes. I bet that cinematographer's work would sing compared to the guy/gal who shoots a Scarlet without that equipment and knowledge.

Cinematographers have always been concerned with image capture, but the best know that the light on set makes the image. Give Steven Poster ASC an HVX with his lighting kit, and I bet he runs circles around any of us with a Scarlet, Red One or Epic.

I think there is a lot more to a quality image than the size of the chip.

That doesn't even take into consideration the story--what is the story being told and what look is best for it? (And is the story worth telling?)

A great film story shot on "lower res" equipment will score the audience every time over the top-quality image of a soulless movie.

Watch the Duplass Brothers' THE PUFFY CHAIR. The film got them in to Sundance, and they just released a second film, BAGHEAD. Puffy Chair is full of out of focus shots. They joke they won't win any cinematography awards. But the film has heart and a story, and audience (and the Sundance festival screeners) overlooked the technical deficiencies for great storytelling and acting.

And they work in Hollywood now. They have careers. (I guess this post is directed at the filmmakers here, who are writers and directors as well as cinematographers.)

Imagine bringing even HVX-quality footage to a great story--the audience is ready for it. They're waiting. Eagerly.

P.S. In the wedding industry, I see more cinematographers bringing flying crane shots to empty reception halls and dizzying shots spinning around groups of bridesmaids and groomsmen, but spinning the camera around them doesn't add any emotional content. It's all just show, without substance.

More wedding videographers are setting up all the shots, shooting the couple walking toward and away from them in slow motion in perfectly controlled images. That's all fine and good, but where's the reality? The emotion of the day? (That takes more skill to capture because you could miss it if you're not in control.)

We have to remember not to sacrifice content for style and high-res images. Emotions trump fancy camera chips every time. It's just the way it is. (But dammit if that emotional stuff isn't fleeting, and easily missed, and we do so love control.)

At what point is the art subjective and we have become so realistic, so sharp as to be too sharp? Maybe a little softness is good for the storyteller?

[Postmaster]

Amen!

[TimurCivan]

All im gonna say is this.

The Scarlet will be great because if it puts out a stellar image, essentially what will happen is, everyone will buy one, and it will be the great equalizer. Then as is what happened with the HVX200, the talented individuals will rise to the top of the market, not because they have the hottest gear, but because they have the skills neccesary to make the hottest gear looks good.

Im looking forward to it.... theres gonna be some great 3k floating around... and alot of REALLLY bad 3k floating around.

[Kenneth]

And eventually, a bunch of used 3K cameras floating around!

[TimurCivan]

im waiting for the used RED ONE bloom......

[Kenneth]

I've worked with a Red and the shooting process was painfully slow. I shoot indy features and can work rather quickly with the HVX.

For anyone who's interested, keep in mind that the Red cameras are suited for large productions, with large crews and ACs. There is nothing quick about shooting Red (in my experience.)

[TimurCivan]

yea that's the idea... treat it like a film camera....

[Jim Simon]

What's so slow about shooting with RED?

[John Caballero]

Red One is still emerging and it will be a long while until is more user friendly, especially the post production part.

[TimurCivan]

you need a proper 1st AC, monitor, bigger tripod, support systems, etc.. all needs a bigger/more experienced crew.

at 4k, you need to be precise with focus. even more so than HD.

[puredrifting]

you need a proper 1st AC, monitor, bigger tripod, support systems, etc.. all needs a bigger/more experienced crew.

at 4k, you need to be precise with focus. even more so than HD.

Timur:

When shooting with the RED One at 4K, how are people getting accurate focus with just 1080 capable monitors?

Same with Scarlet. As we have all learned, it's almost pointless to shoot handheld with certain cameras in certain situations because it's almost impossible to focus the camera accurately unless you have an AC pulling focus for you.

D

[Mattykins]

When we were shooting with the RED we were measuring for focus. That was the most accurate for us.

I wouldn't say the RED is any slower than shooting film. When you are offloading HDDs it takes a while. Especially when putting them on redundant drives.

You need a full camera department though. It is exactly like shooting film - with some different nuances. It isn't a point and shoot camera - that's for sure.

[TimurCivan]

When we were shooting with the RED we were measuring for focus. That was the most accurate for us.

I wouldn't say the RED is any slower than shooting film. When you are offloading HDDs it takes a while. Especially when putting them on redundant drives.

You need a full camera department though. It is exactly like shooting film - with some different nuances. It isn't a point and shoot camera - that's for sure.

EXACTLY. you need capable people for each job... Tape measure and marks have worked for the Film workflow for years..., in film there is no Monitor for the 1st.... well actually there is, but just shows the video tap which you never use anyway for focus...

you set up marks, on the FF, and use that... its SCARY as hell if youre not used to it. this is why its SOOO important for actors to hit their marks...

[HVXSHROPSHIRE]

is this really even a thread, how can you compare a 3 k camera with a 1080 camera. The HVX is great and all but REd Scarlet is crazy.

[Jim Simon]

I'm with you Shropshire (Slasher?). I'm a big Panasonic fan, and am eagerly awaiting reviews of the forthcoming 170. But the more I read about the Scarlet, the more I start to see the 170 as overpriced and underfeatured by comparison.

[Mattykins]

As a general reminder, the Scarlet might sound amazing, but at this point doesn't yet exist.

We just need to wait and see what happens.

[OUinLA]

As a general reminder, the Scarlet might sound amazing, but at this point doesn't yet exist.

We just need to wait and see what happens.

I've been following Red long enough and have used the Red One enough to not have any doubts about the Scarlet.

3K resolution, 120 fps continuous in 3k, 180fps in 3k for 5 seconds, HDMI out, CF cards (or better), for $3000. That's pretty hard to beat.

Not to mention it likely will have in camera ramping, a sweet piece of glass and the workflow keeps getting easier and easier, much like what happened with P2

[David Saraceno]

I'm with you Shropshire (Slasher?). I'm a big Panasonic fan, and am eagerly awaiting reviews of the forthcoming 170. But the more I read about the Scarlet, the more I start to see the 170 as overpriced and underfeatured by comparison.

Actually, I've not seen anything firm about Scarlet. And what I've read is basically conjecture.

That was the nature of One, and all or most or none of that conjecture will or might be implemented.

I don't think we'll see Scarlet until NAB2009. And from I've read, a fully outfitted Scarlet will run more than a HPX170.

Actually editing and CC should be interesting as well.

[Luis Caffesse]

Actually, I've not seen anything firm about Scarlet. And what I've read is basically conjecture.

Well, they do have specs listed on the RED site, and Jim said back in July that the specs are now locked down.
Then again... he has also insinuated that they've got a few surprises still to reveal.
But - I think we have at least an idea of what to expect.


And from I've read, a fully outfitted Scarlet will run more than a HPX170.

Sure, but that will always be the case - won't it?
I mean, a 'fully outfitted' HPX170 will run as much as an EX-3 probably.
And a 'fully outfitted' EX-3 could run as much as an HPX500... etc etc.


Actually editing and CC should be interesting as well.
That is definitely going to be the most interesting thing to watch develop.
It's going to be a fascinating year.

[David Saraceno]

Luis.

I think we're are saying the same thing -- you should said it better.

My point is that Scarlet has yet to reach Golden Master, so to speak. Comparisons now are still conjecture.

We looked strongly as Scarlet, but feel that it is far more efficient to deal with DVCProHD than what Scarlet will produce.

And we don't have any need for anything bigger than 1080.

[Luis Caffesse]

My point is that Scarlet has yet to reach Golden Master, so to speak. Comparisons now are still conjecture.

Absolutely - not only conjecture, but completely meaningless seeing as we're comparing things available today to a virtually unknown to arrive in roughly 7 months.
It's easy for people to get wrapped up in these sorts of things because the 'future' camera will always seem more appealing.
And it should... considering it doesn't exist yet.
:)


We looked strongly as Scarlet, but feel that it is far more efficient to deal with DVCProHD than what Scarlet will produce.

This is exactly why as of now I'm planning on getting a Scarlet as soon as its released - but I will not be getting rid of my HPX170 (which I'll hopefully get upon release). Too much of my work right now depends on fitting into people's existing workflows.

Scarlet will hopefully be the big splash everyone is hoping for - but I have to make sure I can still make a living while I wait for the water to settle back down.

[Luis Caffesse]

And now everyone's point on why you shouldn't compare cams before the exist becomes painfully clear....

RED announced today that Scarlet's specs are changing - details are forthcoming.
:)

[puredrifting]

Yes, the HPX-170 is supposedly shipping this week and Scarlet is even further away from the reality of being able to purchase one. Yes, Jim will change it for the better but I suspect that most of us will not have one until about this time next year. Waiting to a produce a project based upon the availability of the Scarlet is sheer self-delusion.

Now we don't even know exactly what it will be or when we will be able to buy one.

I am with Luis, buy a 170 and make lots of money. Scarlet may happen one day. Or it may not. In the economy we are entering, who knows what is going to happen? Experts are saying that what our economy is going through right now is unprecendented in the history or our country so I hope that upstarts like RED can even survive.

Best,

Dan

[stickman]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned here is that the Scarlet is using a CMOS sensor which will be subject to the same rolling shutter issues as other cameras such as the EX1. I think depending upon the kind of work you do with the camera a Scarlet may actually end up turning out worse footage. I wrestled with the EX1 vs HVX debate until I understood what the strengths of each sensor type are. I shoot mostly action sports and some weddings / events. I know for me that while I might consider purchasing a Scarlet as a second camera I can't imagine replacing the HVX with it but that (to me) depends upon the kind of shooting you do.

[TheMusician]

Stickman, you also need to be aware that the EX1 is essentially a first generation CMOS sensor(as far as XDCAM goes). Manufactures are working every day to reduce the read-reset times on the CMOS sensors, and when this gets fast enough, there should be no rolling shutter issues. Jim knows this and has been working on it since the RED ONE was released, which is why there has been so much discussion on the RED forums about the Mysterium X and the Monstro sensors that Jim is working on. Those will be 2nd and 3rd generation sensors which will be released in the Scarlet and Epic(whatever those two turn out to be), and I find it impossible to imagine that they would put out footage that will be "worse" than the EX1. Keep your fingers crossed, but I imagine we are in for a very pleasant surprise.(Me being optomistic)

[puredrifting]

The Musician:

Thanks for educating us about these new sensors. I have shot quite a bit with the EX-1 and the rolling shutter issues are a big deal for me and the type of work that I do. I don't own the EX-1, but do own an HVX-200 that is being replaced with an HPX-170.

I really like the way CMOS imagers look, my old DSLR, the Nikon D-80 used a CCD and my newer DSLR, the Nikon D-300 uses a CMOS imager and I like the look of the CMOS better. But for motion capture, those rolling shutter defects are pretty tough to work around in certain shooting situations so it's good to know that the market is addressing this.

Looking forward to the Scarlet, whatever it will be!

Dan

[stickman]

Stickman, you also need to be aware that the EX1 is essentially a first generation CMOS sensor(as far as XDCAM goes). Manufactures are working every day to reduce the read-reset times on the CMOS sensors, and when this gets fast enough, there should be no rolling shutter issues. Jim knows this and has been working on it since the RED ONE was released, which is why there has been so much discussion on the RED forums about the Mysterium X and the Monstro sensors that Jim is working on. Those will be 2nd and 3rd generation sensors which will be released in the Scarlet and Epic(whatever those two turn out to be), and I find it impossible to imagine that they would put out footage that will be "worse" than the EX1. Keep your fingers crossed, but I imagine we are in for a very pleasant surprise.(Me being optomistic)

That's a good point. I guess (like has already been said) we will have to wait and see. I also seriously doubt it won't be better than the EX1 but whether the read-reset times can be improved enough for me to "upgrade" from the HVX, we will have to wait and see. I hope they are because it would be nice to have the higher resolution without the sacrifice. Right now I have chosen to sacrifice a bit of sharpness in order to avoid the issues that the EX1 has due to rolling shutter. At the very least the Scarlet should push the market even further to delivering higher-end features at better prices and if for no other reason than that people should be excited about it.

[Justin Kuhn]

I was looking at that iguana shot they threw up. If you look at the darkest and brightest parts of the lizard you can't really tell where the detail falls off. I think that speaks as to image quality.

My concern is that shooting with Scarlet will be a big PITA. That would be disappointing, but it would still be cinema-quality footage in a small, comparatively cheap package--which is why I bought an HVX at the time I did. I was also swayed because of the 60p function. So giving me even more fps makes me want this camera. That's a lot of camera for whatever the money, fairly portable too, I think I would learn how to deal.

My other, lesser concern right now is what if I get this camera whatsis or that camera whozit, will I be able to use it with a RED if I somehow make that jump? Probably not. That's got me pricing a new edit rig and light kits rather than camera gear. But with a Scarlet? Maybe.

But I'd probably keep my HVX around as backup.

[FREUDENBERG_FILMS]

Is there a prototype scarlet yet?
Is there any footage from it?

[Beat Takeshi]

Yeah that Iguana shot is sick. Its so real it almost looks fake and like you said, the dark to light transition is soo smooth.

[wgzn]

Is there a prototype scarlet yet?

i would imagine that the second ANY scarlet info is available it will spread like unprecedented wildfire.

[Steve Eisen]

Scarlet is in a world of its own. It is real and will be shipping by the Fall. The price will be under $4000 complete with a lens. Yes, you can add more options to it to add cost.

I just saw a presentation on Monday by Ted Schilowitz.

http://www.scherrtech.com/wordpress/2009/03/25/why-the-future-is-red-with-scarlet-epic-coming-in-2010-28000x9334/

[wgzn]

thing about red is availability once a product is released. last i spoke to the folks at red, it was still 6 months to get a red one in hand.