Epic and Scarlet release in 2010

Status
Not open for further replies.
stockfuel said:
Otis, i think with your smaller production... it would be possible to maintain that level of service.... but for RED, i'm not sure.... the EVF has been on back order for how long? If an EVF broke, it is very unlikely that one could be sent out next day.

Hopefully they are now really ramping up the production of these units so that stock is always ready.
Click to expand...

It's an emergency that will not happen very often. Any manufacturer or integrator should be able to keep a stock for all key items. The capital cost is not very high, it will easily dissappear in the running costs of a business.

This business is very demanding. A simple part can save quite a lot of money in a production. If a company does not want to take the capital cost, perhaps they can offer it as an service. $XXXX a year for next day shiping of any part? I would pay for that. Replacement of a part can easily cost $1000 for shipping/travelling alone, not to mention the cost in the budget and timeframe of a feature. I have heard lots of these stories lately.

I would rather have spares of everything important with me all the time though. Or a backup camera if it's one of the integrated types that make part replacement impossible. And by a backup camera I don't mean a $800 consumer Sony:)
 
Immediate service might be an issue, even though a bunch of rental houses carry Red stuff nowadays probably. As for my experience, while shooting in italy had a trouble with a red drive. Sent it to Red in London overnight and got it back fixed quite soon. But definitely that's not one of their strengths and it can be a problem in certain production and in certain countries.
However, for me personally, being based in NYC and shooting mostly domestically it would that big of a deal I think, and at a similar price I see it as a better (both short and long term) investment than the Sony's F3.
 
And Red have been very professional so far. There is a personal approach in everything, you can get people on the phone and you can discuss with them in the forums. They are part of the community. The delays due to outsourcing in manufacturing for Red unique designs is logical, they obviously need a lot of units to do a batch of production.

I have seen equally impressive signs of quality service from Panasonic's "representative" to dvxuser, Jan.

What I find amazing, is the approach of Ikonoskop, they manufacture a camera many see as competitive to Drama. Their product requires large production batches for everything like Red and it even comes with vendor specific patented media.

But they get posts like this on their one post per day forum (posted 2 (working) days ago):

"although there are very limited information out there and forums are almost "dead" i decided to buy a-cam dII (i sold my RED ) because i like the picture-raw.
i transferred the deposit last week and send 2 emails for very basic questions. no response!
i called the phone in your web site in several times. no answer!
Hey!
do you hear me??? i am trying to buy this product! does it mean anything to you????
"

If you think a viewfinder on backorder is bad, imagine trying to get the patented SSD card that requires large volume production for the small niche Ikonoskope dII 2 years from now, when sales will have slown down and orders will not be worth minimum production volumes.
 
Ikonoscop was dead 2 years ago (actually from day one because of their "concept" - at least in my book).
Anyone who sells his RED and forks out a deposit to Iconoscoup could also throw his money out of the window.

Frank
 
After doing that, the guy should at least get some presales support. It's strange when a handful of people try to support themselves on an official company forum.
 
I think the "Subject to change" tag gives them alot of room to abuse their position and following. I think they are generally genuine people and want the products out as much as the rest of us... but I do think they are prone to dangle that RED carrot a little too often.

They have a great, mature product on the market.... it is time they had a great, mature business attitude too. The whole "rogue warrior against the camera world" attitude has grown tired.
 
Subhadip said:
It's not an announcement. It's not a new release date. Just an informal, unofficial opinion. Someone asked Jim Jannard whether he thought the Scarlet S35 will be out by April, to which Jim replied "Before...". And right below the post you have a big disclaimer saying "Everything is subject to change...". As simple as that. Oh, how imaginations run wild and rumours spread!

Technically, you could label such open interaction with your customers as "unprofessional". But some folks seem to like it.

As for the April date, don't count on it. It will be here when it's ready. Just don't take RED's projections seriously, they are no good at it.
Click to expand...
It shouldn't be me here posting this once I am one of those who has supported this project from day one. Taking Jim's posts as a way to do campaign pro RED, even though when they can be not a perfection as far as a realistic viewpoint concerns ;-) Pure (viral) marketing anyway. Anyhow, it has made the success of RED, do not forget.

I need to say it though. This post resumes all. The king goes naked from now on. It is simply not fair. LOL :-)
 
RED said from the very beginning that they would do this their way. And so they have.

They said that their way would be different than Sony, Canon, Pansonic, JVC, etc. And so it has been.

They said to expect missed delivery dates. And so delivery dates have come and gone.

They said to expect something fantastic, something ahead of its time. And so - 2 years later - we continue to expect nothing less. And from recent specs and recent delivery estimates/opinions/divinations, it will be both fantastic and ahead of its time.

Now where'd I leave my Kool-Aid?
 
Imagine that the company had embraced the dslr type of movement (people) rather than rejecting them as the type of sub human being. In a meeting where they had to talk about the scraping of the original scarlet and they said " People (many) are raving about using large sensor photo camera even with inferior form factor, codec, moire and aliasing. Ok lets see if we can design a product to tap into this large market and something that won' t take years for us to produce. What do we have in terms of technology now, ok a 4k camera with about ok low light sensitivity, good dynamic range and fantastic codec. So we have to provide a middle ground to provide a good product and a competitive price to the dslr and that does not compete directly with our R1 camera and future Epic and S35 Sarlet.

So large sensor s35.
2k resolution... no we are red it will be 2.5 k because we always have to be better than the rest
12 stop solid dynamic range
Larger pixel so good to very good low light quality using same generation tech as R1

So, good large sensor camera that is a large step above dslr camera but enough differentiation to not compete with the redone and Epic. No HDR to have enough product differentiation. It could be the 2.5 to 2.5 k camera and fully kited at about $ 5000. The body could cost from $2500 to $5000 with some ad-dons for 2 to 3 grand. They would have sold in the tens of thousand of these camera. Take most of the Dslr video market, corporate video, weddings etc, etc... hmmm the sub human user according to the yes red zealots cinematographers. It would have made red raw ubiquitous in all market and a solid base from which to grow and have financial stability by volume shipment. Do you think nikons make more money with its flagship D3x or d7000. The margin is much lower but the volume are much much larger and much more stable. More so it would have been much more easier to produce the electronic as you would need less cutting edge technologies because the pixel would be much larger and it would need only one quarter of the redone data throughput etc.


hmmm, if this camera existed, unfortunately a project like otis is working on a smaller sensor, and not enough volume to get low prices.
 
OK, everyone calm down and back off. Posts have been deleted.

There is absolutely NOTHING about any of this which requires anyone to get personal or to get heated. It's a company; it's a camera. It's not life or death.
 
Red has made it abundantly clear that they will build their cameras to what they consider to be professional quality and performance levels. They have not rejected DSLR users, it is just that they are building true digital cinema motion cameras, not still cameras or HD video cameras, and they can't meet their own standards at such a low market price, nor being a small company can they provide professional market level support services to a large mass market.
Why should they compromise their goals and standards to meet a consumer market price just so people can buy something with the RED logo on it? There are already reasonable solutions for those markets as is, Red has chosen not to participate at that level, and I think it is a wise choice for them.
 
For all the "maturity" issues people claim against Red -- Red doesn't waste a large percentage of your money on their advertising.

Sony, Panasonic, Canon, Nikon... (et. al.) all waste X% creating half-truth propaganda to sell you on their products.

I would argue that Red has taken the far more mature path, and kicked the marketers and advertisers to the curb. Their products sell themselves, and they are not hurting for business. The criticisms here are essentially toothless and will not affect Red's sales, because the products produce professional quality imagery at a good price. There's nothing "immature" about that.

Some of the hollow criticisms, however...
 
Razz16mm said:
Red has made it abundantly clear that they will build their cameras to what they consider to be professional quality and performance levels. They have not rejected DSLR users, it is just that they are building true digital cinema motion cameras, not still cameras or HD video cameras, and they can't meet their own standards at such a low market price, nor being a small company can they provide professional market level support services to a large mass market.
Why should they compromise their goals and standards to meet a consumer market price just so people can buy something with the RED logo on it? There are already reasonable solutions for those markets as is, Red has chosen not to participate at that level, and I think it is a wise choice for them.
Click to expand...

The professional direction was an afterthought, a very recent change to the plan. Even though the initial product was moderately priced (Red One), starting with 3K for 3K, the marketing was directed to the low end. Red tried to hit the soccer moms.

The consumer did not knock on Red's door and ask for an affordable digital cinema camera. Red knocked the consumer's door, promised the impossible and did not deliver.

The problem people have is not this broken promise though. The camera is not the problem. It's the attitude of the company against those who cannot afford their cameras. I will be the first to say that dSLRs offer substandard imaging, but I understand what they offer and how useful they are, and I understand the limitations of a production. The fact that some people cannot afford to be your customers does not give you the right to offend them. Many people are stretching far enough to afford the 5,000 euro tools, not everyone is a working professional, and even professionals would use something more affordable if it did the job.

Leaving well paid commercials, music videos and event photography aside, many people were interested in Red for low budget cinematography. And what is cinematography at this level? Entire features shot with ultra low budgets. Projects that start with only a part of the budget in hand and hope to pull though. Filmmaking is a great way to waste money and a low budget feature is a great sacrifice to many filmmakers. These people are creative individuals and they want to express themselves through cinema. They are artists. The last thing these people wanted to hear is someone judging them based on their buying power. If they are into cinema, they might have been broke in the past, and they might be broke in the future. And they might need your support at that very moment.

All I'm saying is that creating tools for art, is a very unique thing, it's not like any other business. You are not a manufacturer or a merchant, you are part of the process. It requires a certain sensitivity and James Jannard has gloriously demonstrated that he lacks that sensitivity. This alienated people who cannot afford the new direction of Red cameras, but it also alienated some of those who supported Red in their first years by buying Red One and spreading the use of the Red product. You can't mend that with a resolution chart shot.
 
+ 10 for your post Otis. it is the arrogant stance of red which is the biggest problem. As if someone who can' t afford a red is a sub human being. And to say that red has made things clear in any way from the start is a big understatement or even lye. I haven' t seen many product changed so much direction from market, form factor, delivery etc, than the red. Would anyone be astonished if lets say they scrap the S35 scarlet or delay it for one more year after the epic, or jack the price by 30%. I am not saying it is going to happen, but no one knows. If anything everything is blurry with red. Is panasonic Af-100 going to be out in the next 2 month at less than $ 5000 and the sony f3 in the next 6 month at its price point, I bet it will.
 
polfilmblog said:
For all the "maturity" issues people claim against Red -- Red doesn't waste a large percentage of your money on their advertising.

Sony, Panasonic, Canon, Nikon... (et. al.) all waste X% creating half-truth propaganda to sell you on their products.
Click to expand...

And examples of that would be.........
 
Daniel, things like 'arrogant stance' are exactly what I referred to above. There is no need to inject that kind of negative charge into the thread. Things are getting out of hand on the site and we're taking steps to correct it, so please refrain.
 
Otis:

Thank you for so clearly delineating the situation of people like me, people who want to make movies for the love of it, as well as we can and with the best tools we can afford, and expect, with no regret whatsoever, to have to pay for the entire endeavor out of our own pockets. To have been led to believe that an exciting tool like the Red would be in our grasp, and to see it slip away, bit by agonizing bit for two years, has indeed been disappointing.
 
Otis Grapsas said:
The professional direction was an afterthought, a very recent change to the plan. Even though the initial product was moderately priced (Red One), starting with 3K for 3K, the marketing was directed to the low end. Red tried to hit the soccer moms.

The consumer did not knock on Red's door and ask for an affordable digital cinema camera. Red knocked the consumer's door, promised the impossible and did not deliver.

All I'm saying is that creating tools for art, is a very unique thing, it's not like any other business. You are not a manufacturer or a merchant, you are part of the process. It requires a certain sensitivity and James Jannard has gloriously demonstrated that he lacks that sensitivity. This alienated people who cannot afford the new direction of Red cameras, but it also alienated some of those who supported Red in their first years by buying Red One and spreading the use of the Red product. You can't mend that with a resolution chart shot.
Click to expand...

The original mission statement for Scarlet was as a professional 2/3" B-camera/crash camera/compact camera to match the RED 1. " Soccer Mom" was an off the cuff comment from Ted in one interview, not a marketing statement. It was always aimed at the professional market, just priced at a relatively prosumer friendly level. Estimated price when the new modular line concept took the place of the original all in one camcorder was $2500 for the interchangeable brain only, no accessories, and $3000 for the fixed lens brain only. The estimated price for the interchangeable brain is now $3750 and a shoot out of the box kit for the fixed originally priced at $4750 is now estimated at $5750 with the added processing power to handle the HDRx mode. The S35 Scarlet was originally estimated at $7000 for the brain only, they haven't said if or how much the price will change for the added features on that model yet. Both are much higher than HD resolution raw format Bayer cameras with native 1.89:1 digital cinema ratio sensors, not 16:9 HD video cameras.

Yet the DSLR level "prosumers" keep asking for a 35mm format, preferably full frame 35mm sized, 1920x1080HD video camera from Red for less than $5k complete shooting package as if this would make any significant difference at all on even the lowest budget dramatic feature wth pretensions to theatrical distribution. Red is not going to make a native 1080p HD sensor camera of any kind. It is not their chosen market and has not been from day one. The technology has not reached a level where robust pro level build quality and reliability as well as truly high level film like image quality in a purpose built digital motion camera can be built or sold by anyone for such a cheap price. Yours included Otis.

The Red One is still after 3 years by far the lowest cost digital camera on the market that is truly capable of delivering near 35mm film image quality in terms of resolution, sensitivity, and dynamic range. There have been more successful independent theatrical feature films over a full range of budget levels shot on Red in the last two years than on any other digital camera system. To say RED is not engaged with or supporting independents is to ignore the massive impact they have already had and the deep support and interaction they have built within the professional film production community at so many levels.
 
Last edited:
Danielvilliers said:
As if someone who can' t afford a red is a sub human being.
Click to expand...

I've seen a number of people say this, but I've never understood it. Nor can I remember reading anything from RED that was critical of end-users. The closest thing I can imagine is the "man up" comment recently which, to me, was basically a frustrated way of saying "Look, we're sorry the price is going to be increasing. Our customers asked for this to happen and we are responding in turn. But it's only going up by $1,000. Get an extra gig, get a small business loan, or put the difference on a credit card. If you can't make it work, you have other options on the market at lower price points." I'm not trying to be blind to the fact that opinions and comments can be hurtful and/or offensive, but I also feel like those same comments are usually far less hurtful/offensive when put into context.

Critical of technology - sure. RED believes that the industry is capable of doing better (and really, they've set out to prove it). They think - for example - if you spend $15,000 you should get an S35 5K sensor with up to 18 stops of DR, a compressed RAW codec, modularity for future upgrades, multiple resolution options, high framerate options, etc. NOT an S35 sensor that outputs at 1080p and records to 8-bit MPEG-2 with the usual video camera accoutrements. (And yes, that camera will also allow a great deal of outputs over HD-SDI, but you don't get that for $15,000).

--

Otis, I agree in part.

I definitely think that in the process of developing Epic and Scarlet, RED has found themselves. They have discovered (or perhaps returned to) what really matters to them and have decided to pursue and attack that goal. And fortunately, they were pretty open about it - the many public delays, announcements, and changes are proof of that. I do feel that the original sentiment some got from the company ("Finally, a ~$4000 cinema camera!") and the reality of the present situation came to a head recently, and those differences were sorted out. I actually suggested to Jim on REDUSER to make clear where RED stood on the "3K for 3K deal" and the idea of very low cost cameras. He responded minutes later with his post about their "new" professional mindset.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top