hvx vs scarlet

ProfessorU said:
The RED One is a digital cinema camera (not a video camera).
Click to expand...

Well... that's a term that Red coined 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.

ProfessorU said:
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.
Click to expand...

Still video.

ProfessorU said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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:
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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
 
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 . . .
 
Jaimebailon said:
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
Click to expand...

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

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.
 
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.
 
ProfessorU said:
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.
Click to expand...


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

.
 
Rippie said:
define "problem"?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.

Mac said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
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.
 
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 said:
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?
Click to expand...

Justyn:

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

Dan
 
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.
 
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.
 
puredrifting said:
Justyn:

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

Dan
Click to expand...



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.
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top