Press Release: HMC150, "the new DVX"

Robert M Wright said:
That would involve implementing two entirely different codecs in the camera, and boost cost. It would also put the HMC150 in direct competition with their own HVX (although it would be cool).
Click to expand...

The P2 slot in and of itself doesn't require implementation of any particular codec. A P2 card can hold data of any kind, just like any other kind of memory card.
 
David Jimerson said:
The P2 slot in and of itself doesn't require implementation of any particular codec. A P2 card can hold data of any kind, just like any other kind of memory card.
Click to expand...

What's the point though? It would just be a very expensive way to transfer video to computer faster, when it will be able to be done with SDHC at at least 3x real time anyway (that's being achieved with 24mbps HDV from the Z7, with 133X CF already).
 
Robert M Wright said:
I won't underestimate Jim Jannard again this time. Last time around, with the RED ONE, it sounded to me like a lot of bluster, when I first read what he was saying a couple of years ago. Later it occurred to me, that by using CMOS technology, he could conceivably make good on his promises, which of course, he did.
Click to expand...
I'm not underestimating anything -- heck, I bought a Red One. But the Red One is in no way aimed at the video market, not by any stretch of the imagination. And the Scarlet has been called a Pocket Professional Digital Cinema camera. I don't konw anything about it (nobody does) but I'd be willing to be that it doesn't have anything to do with "video".

but it seems fairly clear that his primary objective isn't to make another billion dollar fortune on cameras either.
Click to expand...
Well, I'd disagree there too. They've sold about 3,000 Red Ones so far, at an average cost of about $40,000 including accessories, and the expensive accessories (Red Prime set, $20000; Red 18-85, $10,000) haven't even started shipping yet, so let's call it $50,000. Do the math, that's $150,000,000. 1/6th of the way to a billion, and he's only been shipping for six months!
 
Barry_Green said:
I'm not underestimating anything -- heck, I bought a Red One. But the Red One is in no way aimed at the video market, not by any stretch of the imagination. And the Scarlet has been called a Pocket Professional Digital Cinema camera. I don't konw anything about it (nobody does) but I'd be willing to be that it doesn't have anything to do with "video".


Well, I'd disagree there too. They've sold about 3,000 Red Ones so far, at an average cost of about $40,000 including accessories, and the expensive accessories (Red Prime set, $20000; Red 18-85, $10,000) haven't even started shipping yet, so let's call it $50,000. Do the math, that's $150,000,000. 1/6th of the way to a billion, and he's only been shipping for six months!
Click to expand...

Jim seems to be very interested in creating cameras that can essentially replace film (at least that's my take). I don't see any reason why that would preclude using one of his products as the guts of a camcorder (in essence) though.

I don't think it is his primary objective, but he may very well make another billion. :-Laugh(DBG):
 
Barry_Green said:
No bluff to be called. :)


Any source, transcoded to AVC-HD. The point was to demonstrate the format's capability. I don't know what the source was, probably HDD5 or HDCAM-SR, but the point was that they transcoded to AVC-HD at 8 megabits and projected it, and it looked pretty darn good.

As always, I'm separating the camera head away from the recording format, because the format is solid but so far it's been limited by being mated to little wimpy consumer camcorder recording heads. The format by itself is excellent.
Click to expand...

Ok cool, thanks for clearing that up. :thumbsup:
 
One of the likely reasons for the success of RED ONE thus far (aside from great price/performance value), is that Jim Jannard decided to build the camera head so it could easily be used with third party products, rather than trying to build a wall around it with a proprietary design for interfacing with lens, etc.

In doing so, he's created a product with a ton of flexibility and I just don't see any reason for him to do otherwise with Scarlet. I don't see any big reason that he can't deliver Scarlet with just as great price/performance value, and still make a good chunk of dough doing it.

A heck of a lot of prosumers are trying real hard to imitate film, using video cameras. Scarlett could easily wind up being a dream come true for them. As I understand it, that could be quite lucrative as well. For example, I've heard that there is actually a healthy little niche market for shooting weddings with 8mm film (for a retro look). Scarlett could potentially make it very easy and affordable for prosumers to deliver that look.

When Jim first talked about the RED ONE, my immediate reaction was to yawn, thinking to myself that here's just another rich blow hard stroking his own ego (with a gusto). Well, I was way mistaken there.

I was initially an outright cynical skeptic. I'm sure not anymore, even though I cannot afford a RED ONE. Heck, I think it could be a lot of fun to go to work for Jim Jannard if I was able to (I'm disabled). Here's a guy that instead of just being another rich guy, with an overblown ego to match his wallet, is actually indulging a passion very intelligently, and apparently just loves to mystify us with quite bold (yet well thought out) claims!
 
I'd bet dollars to dimes that Scarlet is a 2K camera head with a single 16mm CMOS image sensor in it. That just makes way, way to much sense, when you really think about it. Should be pretty dang slick, after seeing what they did with RED ONE.
 
Robert M Wright said:
I'd bet dollars to dimes that Scarlet is a 2K camera head with a single 16mm CMOS image sensor in it. That just makes way, way to much sense, when you really think about it. Should be pretty dang slick, after seeing what they did with RED ONE.
Click to expand...

I actually like this way of thinking. RED ONE is 35mm and SCARLET is 16mm. PL Mount, Interchangable to Nikon which will officially be shipping en masse. CF and RED DRIVE recording options.

CMOS or not... if the camera quantities are shipping plenty then it's a shoe in for top spot.

The only thing holding RED back is the same thing that some of us are apprehensive about when considering the HMC150: post workflow. There's no denying that P2 is established and simply immediate to the client.

Then again, by the time the cam's released (If announced in the next 15 days, I would expect the release to be somewhere near the end of 09 given the small size of Jannard's company-- let's hope I'm way off) the post workflow could be seamless with your standard Quad Core beast.

Until there's something solid on the camera, though, my eyes are peeled for this lil' Puppy, a new HVX200 (Something better than a simple "A" upgrade) and Canon's first Prosumer Tapeless offering.
 
Robert M Wright said:
What's the point though? It would just be a very expensive way to transfer video to computer faster, when it will be able to be done with SDHC at at least 3x real time anyway (that's being achieved with 24mbps HDV from the Z7, with 133X CF already).
Click to expand...

Didn't say there was a point to it, only that it doesn't require any particular codec.
 
Robert M Wright said:
I'd bet dollars to dimes that Scarlet is a 2K camera head with a single 16mm CMOS image sensor in it. That just makes way, way to much sense, when you really think about it. Should be pretty dang slick, after seeing what they did with RED ONE.
Click to expand...
Many folks on REDuser.com arrived to this same conclusion when it was revealed that Jarred had been reserving various domains with the Scarlet and 2K name attached.
Somebody's anticipating yet another huge swell of unique 2K indie shooters out there that they have to create a whole new subset of forums dedicated to it.
Must be one serious camera. :)
 
There were a lot of comments and I won't be able to answer everyone in detail, but let me provide a general answer...

Scarlet is a big unknown, is it under $10,000 or under $5,000 or ... ???? Plus, how much for a fully working system??? Odds are that Scarlet is to a whole different market that the HMC150 is going after.


The HMC150 is likely to be under $4,000 and its target market is the event videographers, student film makers, VERY small operations (with very little money), and prosumers. This slice of the market is within the $3,000 to $4,000 range. OK, AVCHD is not rocket science, so all of the major camera companies should be able to put something together in the $3k to $4K range.

The problem I see is that the HVX-200 was introduced 3 years ago, but what has JVC or Canon come up with that offers solid state recording for the professional market in the price range of the HVX-200? At least Sony has came up with the EX-1 and the overpriced Z7, but Canon and JVC seem to be doing nothing. (I hope that come NAB they prove me wrong, we need more cameras with solid state recording.)


Flash memory is far more flexible than tape and MPEG-4 AVC H.264 at 24 Mbps is better able to deal with complex motion than MPEG-2 (HDV) at 25 Mbps. It doesn't take a PhD in computer science to realize that an AVCHD camera is the next logical step and HDV is yesterday's technology.

Now if we look at AVCHD's 4:2:0 and 24 Mbps maximum data rate, it looks lame compared to the higher priced cameras, but compared to HDV it is going to be a clear cut improvement. When I look into this market, Panasonic is positioned to answer, but as for the other camera companies.... (That's why I call them 2 steps behind Panasonic.)


Bob Diaz
 
Guys, I know there's lots of speculation on Scarlet, but Red One owners were assured that Scarlet would not compete with the Red One. It isn't gonna be "the same thing only smaller." I don't know what it'll be, and speculation is almost pointless as we'll all find out in about three weeks. But I would be willing to bet a hundred bucks that it won't be a "video" camera, it won't shoot video, it'll shoot raw and require the same post-process path that the Red One does. The question is: will it be a standalone unit that's good enough on its own? Or is it intended to be almost an "accessory" to a Red One (a crash-cam, b-cam, etc?) We'll find out a few weeks from now. But I can't imagine that it'll be any threat to the overall video market. The Red One isn't; it's aimed at a very specific niche (and hit that target squarely).
 
Barry, for those of us not able to be in Las Vegas for NAB, which blogs do you recommend to keep up with all the news. Especially about the Scarlet announcement?
 
Barry_Green said:
But I would be willing to bet a hundred bucks that it won't be a "video" camera, it won't shoot video, it'll shoot raw and require the same post-process path that the Red One does.
Click to expand...

The beauty I foresee, is that a single stream of RAW out of a 2k camera head, using intraframe only wavelet compression, could probably be managed by today's low cost desktop quad core CPUs, in real time, without a ton of innovation. If not, low cost processor power will be there real soon. 4k is 4x more taxing on CPU (and bandwidth to/from hard disk or other media).
 
drdimento said:
I've been hearing about this for ?? years. Is there actually a camera yet or just hype?
Click to expand...
Actually, when Scarlet is unveiled next month, it will be approximately 1 year to-the-date when word officially leaked out about the project.
I believe that Steve Gibby was the first to report on it from NAB 07, confirmation came directly from RED, afterwhich the speculation has continued to engulf various video forums ever since.
 
drdimento said:
I've been hearing about this for ?? years. Is there actually a camera yet or just hype?
Click to expand...

Just hype thus far (that we can see) and not really much of that. The hype is much more from speculation than any claims Jim Jannard has made (like with RED ONE). He says they will show a prototype at NAB. I believe him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top