A working Scarlet!
- Thread starter bgundu
- Start date
ryan brown
lOwEr CaSe Member
They're rolling out a 2/3rd " interchangeable version. Price-wise... I think last time I checked we were looking at around 9-10k for a working "kit" with the essentials. As of now, that will probably go up at least 2k or so. ?? Just speculation here on prices,fyi
Pietro Impagliazzo
Well-known member
Maybe you have or rent a high-end one... I don't!
If I can set marks digitally and pull between them with REDMote... How's a physical FF any better? Only an Arri wireless FF would do the same work, but hey, it costs the price of a Scarlet, right?
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
I have several.
That isn't the point.
The point is that defining two touch screen points on a 5" monitor to pull focus on isn't going to be as precise or as predictive as a trained AC with experience and skill.
Period.
That isn't the point.
The point is that defining two touch screen points on a 5" monitor to pull focus on isn't going to be as precise or as predictive as a trained AC with experience and skill.
Period.
S. Matthews
Well-known member
just like to clarify about the 3k bayer not full being resolved, the same is true of every single chip bayer camera none resolve their full resolution, check them on focus charts, so the argument well it's not 3k would be the same as saying the 5d is not even 1080, or the 7d, or the GH-1, or the ex-3, or even the f35 (not sure about that one but I believe the only high end camera to resolve a full 1080 is the genisis). so to say it will make great hd but not 3k is a misstatement to me at least until we see it, it is said it will resolve around 2.4k considering some "HD" cams only resolve 600-700 lines yet we use them for HD I can assume scarlet will do a fine 3k when needed and even a fairly nice blow up to 35mm film, but who knows I could be horribly wrong on some of this.
the side handle has plenty of buttons as well as most of them programmable, there are two wheels on the handle that can be set to iris zoom and focus, and I believe their is a zoom rocker as well on the handle, plus if you want to switch between these or which is being controlled by the ring it is the press of a button to switch between them. If you want even more buttons there is the redmote and the redmote pro, the brains have no buttons because it is the brains and it's a modular system you take the buttons wherever you want including a histogram with the redmotes.
have a good one
the side handle has plenty of buttons as well as most of them programmable, there are two wheels on the handle that can be set to iris zoom and focus, and I believe their is a zoom rocker as well on the handle, plus if you want to switch between these or which is being controlled by the ring it is the press of a button to switch between them. If you want even more buttons there is the redmote and the redmote pro, the brains have no buttons because it is the brains and it's a modular system you take the buttons wherever you want including a histogram with the redmotes.
have a good one
Pietro Impagliazzo
Well-known member
Well... I wasn't referring to touch-focus.
But rather the REDMote, which I guess would work best with the Pro version.
I'm not even sure they are producing the Pro already.
And well, if we're talking about a camera that costs less than $10K I don't wanna spend $10K on a remote FF system...
Last edited:
if this was to me ...
I never said it wouldn't make great 3k, but it would definitely make a fantastic 1080. I didn't make any negative remarks about the 3k aspect. Indeed that is the case with all bayer sensors. Also the reason I scale down with every camera, I'm more satisfied when my end sample rate is less than my capture sample. same principles are used in audio too. I think that's the smart thing about this camera. When you scale down to your final output, which by popular standard is smaller than the capture format, it will look great.
And without even having to look at a res chart, not the luma resolution, rather the chroma resolution won't be 3k, like all bayer sensors. there are 2 reds to one green and one blue, each channel will be slightly less than 3k is what i meant. And the reason i like it is because the sweet spot for going to 1080 is somewhere between 2.5-3k on a bayer, if i remember correctly, so that's why i said this is the smartest thing about this cam. They gave you a ton of color information to cram into each pixel of a final 1080 output. Nothing negative at all.
S. Matthews
Well-known member
sorry I realized you didn't say that, it wasn't really at you, but the fact people might think that reading your statement.
I was more replying to that mentality some have on this subject, but I do realize it looked like it was directed at you, which it was not, it was merely brought up by you....
have a good one
I was more replying to that mentality some have on this subject, but I do realize it looked like it was directed at you, which it was not, it was merely brought up by you....
have a good one
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
This is true.
Well, that's not a fair statement, because none of those are using the full chip as far as we know. They're all line-skipping or pixel-binning or some other technique, and no, none of them resolve a full 1080p. But if you want to talk about the native chip resolution, it would be fair to say the 5D isn't 21 megapixels, because its 21mpix sensor is Bayer, and therefore will resolve a true 14-16mpix. And you could say the 7D isn't a full 18mpix and the GH1 isn't a full 14mpix, because both have to go through the demosaic process and will shed 20%-33% of their nominal resolution during that pricess.
EX3 doesn't use any manner of Bayer patter, it's a 3-chip camera and that technology is capable of resolving a full 1080p.
The F35 is the Genesis, basically. You can't buy the Genesis, but you can buy the F35. And they use an RGB Stripe sensor with significant oversampling so yes, they do resolve a full 1080p.
No, it's perfectly accurate, and even the folks at Red would agree. The "3k" mode will deliver, at best, about 2.4k worth of resolution. Which is the same reason why the Epic is offering a 5K mode, because the "4K" of the Red One isn't a true 4K either; you have to start with at least 5K to end up with a real-world 4K once the de-mosaic process is finished. If you shoot 5K on a Red, you'll have about a 4K image when you're done. Shoot 4K, you'll end up with 3.2k. Shoot 3k, you'll end up with something better than 1080p. Shoot 2k, you'll end up with about 720p.
Don't confuse lines of resolution per picture height, with "3k" or "4k" notation, they're not the same. If you want to compare video against k, you can use 2K vs. 1080p, as they're basically the same.
It will likely do a lovely blowup to 35mm film. The DVX has been blown up to film many times and looks pretty darn good, and that's a 0.3k system. So the Scarlet should do just fine. Then again, we've been seeing great filmouts from the HVX for five years now, so worrying about whether something will hold up on a film transfer is something that's been a long-settled issue for many years.
Paul V Doherty
Active member
*yawn*
Wake me when an actual member of the public buys an actual fully functional Red product and posts an actual user review - the same as we would expect from any other actual camera manufacturer.
Wake me when an actual member of the public buys an actual fully functional Red product and posts an actual user review - the same as we would expect from any other actual camera manufacturer.
S. Matthews
Well-known member
well i still don't think that is the case as they play 4k red one material in 4k, so hence if there were a 3k it would be able to play at that.
look now it is just getting confusing again, all I want to say is why is red singled out for this and none of the other cameras that do it.
and I wasn't talking about how much the other camera's resolve off their sensor but of their target resolution, they say 1080 it doesn't fully resolve that that was my point.
I will have to trust you on the f35 and ex3 as I have not shot zone plates with them, but I was sure the ex-3 did not resolve a full 1080 (but would not be surprised if I'm wrong as you said it's three chip I knew that just made a mistake) though on the other hand Graeme metioned shooting zone plates for a high end 1080 cam that did not resole it's full res(thought it was the f35 but I think that was in regards to aliasing), heck even the alexa when they tested it did not resolve a full 1080 (but I think there might have been a mistake as it is a 3k or something sensor that down samples to get 1080 so that shouldn't be the case).
either way my point was some professionals bring up these issues but do not mention it effects far more camera's than most think, and then uninformed people start spreading the wrong information or taking things as negatives which are not(like..... me).
I know I confuse things but resolved lines or whatever the point is they don't resolve what they are supposed to.
look I may not know the specific names and figures and proper terms but don't get hung up on that, you know what I'm trying to say
not knocking any other cameras out there, just trying to clairify some misunderstandings but as Barry pointed out I had some of my own in there but I still disagree with certain things, like will 3k from scarlet look good at 3k I don't think we can say for sure till we see it, though I'm not getting my hopes up.
have a good one and remember kids, knowing is half the battle
look now it is just getting confusing again, all I want to say is why is red singled out for this and none of the other cameras that do it.
and I wasn't talking about how much the other camera's resolve off their sensor but of their target resolution, they say 1080 it doesn't fully resolve that that was my point.
I will have to trust you on the f35 and ex3 as I have not shot zone plates with them, but I was sure the ex-3 did not resolve a full 1080 (but would not be surprised if I'm wrong as you said it's three chip I knew that just made a mistake) though on the other hand Graeme metioned shooting zone plates for a high end 1080 cam that did not resole it's full res(thought it was the f35 but I think that was in regards to aliasing), heck even the alexa when they tested it did not resolve a full 1080 (but I think there might have been a mistake as it is a 3k or something sensor that down samples to get 1080 so that shouldn't be the case).
either way my point was some professionals bring up these issues but do not mention it effects far more camera's than most think, and then uninformed people start spreading the wrong information or taking things as negatives which are not(like..... me).
I know I confuse things but resolved lines or whatever the point is they don't resolve what they are supposed to.
look I may not know the specific names and figures and proper terms but don't get hung up on that, you know what I'm trying to say
not knocking any other cameras out there, just trying to clairify some misunderstandings but as Barry pointed out I had some of my own in there but I still disagree with certain things, like will 3k from scarlet look good at 3k I don't think we can say for sure till we see it, though I'm not getting my hopes up.
have a good one and remember kids, knowing is half the battle
Last edited:
But 4K is a legitimate output format... with 4K projectors.
As far as I know, there are no 3k cinema projectors and no plans to make them, just 2k and 4k. So there will never be any point finishing in 3k. Quad HD might end up being a standard, but that will be something like 3.6k.
It gets confusing, but to sum up, I don't think you will ever want to finish your project in 3k.
S. Matthews
Well-known member
sorry I know that I was just pointing out that it is a possibility and it could display at its acquisition resolution (?), and if played at 4k would not look horrid but this remains to be seen.
so I would like to add that it's not that you can't go 3k it's there is no 3k so you will go 2k.
i apologize as I see I have now caused plenty of confusion over nothing..... I really dislike conversing over internet forums just so hard to articulate a full point sometimes especially when i am talking above my own head.
so I would like to add that it's not that you can't go 3k it's there is no 3k so you will go 2k.
i apologize as I see I have now caused plenty of confusion over nothing..... I really dislike conversing over internet forums just so hard to articulate a full point sometimes especially when i am talking above my own head.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well, that's the thing -- Red doesn't do much to dispell the confusion either. Statements such as "data to burn" and "pixel shift not spoken here" and "4:4:4" are just plain misleading. There is not, in fact, data to burn. And it doesn't record 4:4:4 color sampling, or anything within a mile of it. And while it may not do "pixel shift", it does do a bayer demosaic, which Graeme said is a very similar process.
So don't get hung up on anything, other than this -- if anyone tries to tell you they have some proprietary magical technology with some preposterous name for it, there's a very, very good chance that you're being sold a bottle of snake oil.
So treat it for what it is. Is it a resolved 3K? No, it's nowhere near it. BUT -- when shooting at 3K, it should make for a sharper, higher-res image than just about any 1080p camera. So look past the marketing hype and shovelsful of bullcrap, and look at what it actually is and actually does.
It is indeed. Which is why I say don't listen to what the marketers tell you; instead evaluate the product for what it *actually does*.
S. Matthews
Well-known member
thank you Barry, I think we all need to back away from the hype, and just get back to what we do, shooting and making art(or whatever you want to call it)
Happy holidays
Happy holidays
The side handle and the Redmote both have multiple user programmable buttons as well as a digital proportional zoom rocker. Then you have touchscreen control functions including focus tracking. I don't think the single ring will be much of an issue.
You can say what you will about Bayer sensor color sampling, but it is so far the closest mechanical mimic of how the human eye actually perceives resolution for both luminance and color. That is one reason it has become such a universally accepted sensor design for digital cameras. As to the output file format, you can deBayer and encode it to anything you want, from 16 bit TIFF RGB and ProRes HQ4:4:4 down.
No digital camera of any type fully optically resolves its pixel resolution. 3-chip 1080p cameras don't resolve 1080p either.
You can say what you will about Bayer sensor color sampling, but it is so far the closest mechanical mimic of how the human eye actually perceives resolution for both luminance and color. That is one reason it has become such a universally accepted sensor design for digital cameras. As to the output file format, you can deBayer and encode it to anything you want, from 16 bit TIFF RGB and ProRes HQ4:4:4 down.
No digital camera of any type fully optically resolves its pixel resolution. 3-chip 1080p cameras don't resolve 1080p either.
Last edited: