SCARLET / EPIC swiss army knife camera details announced

TimurCivan said:
28K will replace the Imax format. Horizontally running 70mm.

They seem to shoot alot of it these days.... Its a specialty product yes, but then again, so is a RED camera. They built IMAX format cameras to begin with... how many of them could there be? This is just the Digital Version.
Click to expand...

Tim, dont you think the Epic 645 will compete with IMAX more directly than the 28k
running horizontally? Just in practical terms.... but sure you will get more punch out of the 28k.

unless you dont believe that the latitude and pixels of monstro can compete with real IMAX film or 645 film...
 
Imagine 28k IMAX sized screen of rolling shutter artifact and Skewing. I sincerely hope we get some 35mm dof Red camera alternative this NAB 2009. I am 95% positive Red could not deliver any of the Scarlet or Epic earlier than late fall 2009. Even if the new RED are available earlier than that, I suggest you read all the problems that early RED ONE buyers have to go through.
 
puredrifting said:
...What possible reason can it serve to put out a price point of any kind, if in the same breath you are telling your customers that you reserve the right to change it at any time? All that will do is piss off your customer base. Personally I feel that putting out specs, designs, everything else is fine, then it's just a game but once you start throwing out prices and changing them mid-stream, you are going to alienate a lot of your customers, regardless of disclaimers.
Dan
Click to expand...


Well I like RED and have a lot of confidence in what they will eventually deliver, but that specific point is very valid.

Putting out prices at an early stage is very risky, and as you said, can only upset potential customers should those prices be revised (upwards or course).

I guess it's difficult at times for a company to refrain from being a little too enthusiastic.
 
I highly doubt the 28k red will ever surpass IMAX. IMAX has one of the most reliable cameras ever made. Granted she is a beast. But she can take anything thrown at it.

From Everest to the ocean. There are few places an IMAX camera hasn't been. There are certain problems with digital systems. (Disclaimer: Not just RED - All digital systemes)

I wouldn't trust a RED in a shoot where I would be using IMAX. In fact, I wouldn't trust any digital system to go where IMAX does in place of it. Just because RED came out with a extra-high resolution camera doesn't mean it is going to change anything. I don't even think a computer can handle a datastream like that yet. It's just like the RED ONE. No one has really adopted it into the hollywood mainstream work pattern. Aside from one or two films - which are the exception rather than the rule.

Jumper had a RED on second unit.

Is it revolutionizing the Indie market? Very much so. IMDB has over 100 films being shot on the RED ONE all indies. It gives the indie film maker a high end digital cinema camera for a low daily rental price.

But all that blabbering aside.

Does anyone know what happened to the variable shutter rates on the RED ONE. According to the charts - the RED ONE can't do 24 anymore. Which I find impossible to believe.
 
Last edited:
Mattykins said:
Does anyone know what happened to the variable shutter rates on the RED ONE. According to the charts - the RED ONE can't do 24 anymore. Which I find impossible to believe.
Click to expand...
I think it might just be a typo showing only the max frame rates for each shooting resolution.


-A
 
617 will be very important to filmmakers. Forget Imax for now. I know of two top special fx companies that WILL be buying 617 for their work. It's the perfect camera for them and it's genius.

There are so many people here that just don't get it. Why are so many commercials, TV show and features being shot on Red? Why is there a huge list of Directors and DP's waiting for the Scarlets (even before this announcement)?

It's because Red is doing it the right way. They are making cameras that fit every market. The 2/3 Scarlet would work for just about anything people use HVX for and it's probably going to look a hell of a lot better.
 
Mattykins said:
From Everest to the ocean. There are few places an IMAX camera has been. There are certain problems with digital systems. (Disclaimer: Not just RED - All digital systemes)
Click to expand...

You ever seen the EPIC miniseries "Planet Earth" on BBC or Discovery? That was shot on the Panasonic Varicam... in the Artic... yeah :) :beer:
 
I have seen Planet Earth. High end digital systems have been in many many places. But with the same stroke. I would never replace a digital system for something I would shoot on IMAX.

I'd rather have a film camera than a digital system to catch that once in a lifetime shot that would have been on IMAX. (Not the planet earth documentary - but something that would have been shot on IMAX)

And if I was shooting a documentary in the far reaches of the Earth - I would still chose a Varicam or F23 before choosing a RED. Reliability over resolution.
 
This is interesting because Sony F23 and F35 use CCD technology and are outputing 1080p.

A lot of research went into these cameras. Professionals obviously believe CCD technology is a requirement for production level cameras and 1080p is good enough for the highest level of production.

It's either that or Sony are stupid, have no engineering and technology to produce CMOS, and no experience in this market:)

That can't be true. They started this market and are still quite strong. They are putting multimegapixel cmos technology is every little consumer device in our household they have lots of cmos sensors in their low end camera models. The resolution sticker on a mobile or any 100 euro camera, is the biggest they can fit on the case. It's the first thing a consumer notices on the shelves when shopping for a phone and it's a measure of quality for those that are not technically inclined. But are digital cinema customers consumers? They might be.

Sony engineers just know how physics behave (pixel size vs resolution vs lens capabilities), how sensor technologies compare at this time, how important global shuttering is for professional results, how quality chroma, high dynamic range and good low light performance is better achieved with CCD. And they do know what is overkill for resolution vs sensor size in realistic situations based on production level (budget), and when resolution gets in the way of the imaging performance and workflow of a camera and becomes a disadvantage. Panasonic also use CCD exclusively for any serious camera they make.

A camera is a production tool. That is true for a hvx or an f35. A properly designed tool should not indulge into a megapixel competition. That's what the consumer market is for and why we have 8 megapixel sensors on our mobile phones. A propery designed tool should be focused on producing the best results in a given production situation.
 
Sony is using Cmos in their EX1 and ex3 cameras which are some pretty amazing cameras. I personally hate rolling shutter but its not much of an inconvenience in most situations. I read an article in an HD video magazine comparing CCD and CMOS and really neither seems better than the other. They both have advantages and disadvantages. Both are also evolving, but it seems like Cmos have picked up speed and popularity in the last couple years.
 
Otis Grapsas said:
It's either that or Sony are stupid, have no engineering and technology to produce CMOS, and no experience in this market:)
Click to expand...
Sony knows very well how to make CMOS. But in the paraphrased words of Sony's own Juan Martinez, "If you want the best quality for digital cinema applications, you want a CCD. But if you're making a small handheld camcorder, that's where CMOS is more useful."
 
I agree with the overkill. 5k would for me, hinder the work flow and make it a disadvantage. I love the idea of RAW with full 4:4:4 color sampling but 5k? When would I ever ouput 5 k. Maybe when 4k becomes a standard in 10 years? I am back and forth with my thoughts on the great announcement. On one hand they have announced some pretty amazing thing, but so did Duke Nukem, but on the other hand, what they have announced doesn't do what I want or need it to do... save for the epic which is going to be far out of my price range for many many years. Hmmm
 
I hate RED. They make me want to do robberies.

So... who wants to lend me a few thousand?

I was even thinking of the 5d for a while there.
 
not that many red shoots even get posted in 4k. Shooting 5k in a year from now will be no big deal. Even if it gets finished at 1080 or 2k the oversampling will help. For me it will be more about working with a better sensor than recording more resolution.
 
when i asked my dp friend why shoot 4k (we shot a short film at 2k which played from a beta SP on the big screen at CineVegas and looked amazing - and i'm hyper-critical) and he said you have more leeway with cropping and repositioning. oh, and visual effects would be better.

so, i still wonder, why can't someone (nikon, are you listening???) make a decent dof (whatever sensor size "decent" requires), interchangeable lens, 1080p, no rolling shutter skew or jello, , cmos or ccd, whatever output/compression/raw would be similar to the sony f900 (what we shot our short on), for under $3000? it's gotta be possible.
 
I am sure Canon is awake as well hopefully the unleash a monster at NAB this year. Could you imagine the 5d sensor, minus rolling shutter issues, raw in the xl-hi body.... oh that would be gorgeous.
 
They will, it just takes time. I think before the Scarlett is in full production... Nikon/Canon or one of the other players will have perfected their own technology. These things can't happen overnight though and Canon/Sony/Panasonic will be reluctant to bring out an all singing, all dancing DSLR video that could kill off a very lucrative part of their own business.

Big changes WILL be happening, but you have to be patient or you have to jump on board the first line of the technology (D90 or 5D).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
so, i still wonder, why can't someone (nikon, are you listening???) make a decent dof (whatever sensor size "decent" requires), interchangeable lens, 1080p, no rolling shutter skew or jello, , cmos or ccd, whatever output/compression/raw would be similar to the sony f900 (what we shot our short on), for under $3000? it's gotta be possible.
 
As soon as I can get my hands on one, I'm going for the FF35 Scarlett. I think it'll be amazing. Surely overkill for me, but why not if I have the cash?

That said, I've been doing a lot of soul searching about whether to buy the HPX now, or wait. I don't care if RED has said its learned from its delays. I don't think they will have these out by their stated time. I think it'll be 2010 before we see 1 camera. "not that there's anything wrong with that."

The other thing is that the RED one (and the assumption here is that scarlet and epic will behave the same way) has a rather distinct, "look." I was in a theater yesterday and saw the trailer for Knowing. It definitely looked different than the rest. Also, the shots in low light suffered from a good deal of noise. (I'd like to qualify that by saying the 35mm/DI films previewed, and the film I saw itself Synecdoche, also suffered from noise in the midtones. MUCH more than I expected. Maybe it was the print, but I saw this last time at the theater. Movies are noisey I guess?)

Anyway, back to the look, if RED dominates the D-cinema market, despite the fact that, yes it is RAW, I worry we're going to have a lot of homogenous looking content. That might not even be bad. It's just a thought.

On a personal note; will I still get the HPX? Yes, because it's available now, and I love the look. Will I sell if when I buy the scarlet as I originally planned? No. Because they look so different. There's a different texture to the image, and maybe at some point a filter will be made to replicate the Panny 24p look, but until then the HPX still has a place in digital cinema, a long with ALL of the other cameras out there now.

They're also going to have to up the frame rates on the RED (at some resolution) to 48 FPS, because that seems to be the future that discerning film-goers are screaming for.

My advice to panasonic is, if they want too remain in the D-cinema market. Don't change to single-chip, don't change to CMOS, but up the bandwidth as much as possible for recording, or bring AVC-I to the low end cams. Also, Maybe work on higher rez chips, 1/3inch or more. But they should keep the look different from the RED, they look very different now, and it should stay that way, because if they try and compete with RED, I think they'd lose. Maybe not, but if they all take their place with their own specialty, and approach to cameras, then we the consumers, win.

I don't want to buy a RED camera with a Pansonic label, nor vice versa. I would like it if I could buy both, and use whichever cam is best for the job (or rent). Same for Sony. They all have a different feel, look, approach and that is good.
 
Arrestthisman, you don't have to worry about the digital cinema market turning into a monopoly. RED is basing marketing on the CMOS resolution advantage while almost all other maufacturers opt to maximize pixel quality by using lower resolution and provide unlimited camera motion by using CCD. Pixel quality survives everything, including DVD, SD broadcast and huge compression for the net, while a resolution advantage is lost in downsampling (if not inside the designed for film lens or focus errors). The CMOS shuttering limitations also survive downsampling and compression. The big manufacturers are pretty safe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top