hvx vs scarlet

[Justyn]

Luis. Very true. I think they are masters at marketing.. but they also have been delivering to people that can afford it and that, and soon it will be to people who previously were in the dvxuser price range.. WOW indeed.

 

[OUinLA]

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?

Red has only released one camera so far so who knows how the release will go for Scarlet and Epic. The line about things can and will change, count on it, is a positive in my mind. Some of the features people were expecting with Scarlet have actually been improved from their initial announcement. Not many people are going to complain about a free upgrade.

As for getting a Scarlet when the waiting line is much larger than the Red One...Scarlet is being produced differently. Most likely the whole thing won't be produced and assembled in their offices. It will be produced more like the other video cameras (Sony, Pana, Canon, etc) that meet the demands of the consumers. Red One is a different case and shouldn't be compared to the Scarlet, yet.

What Red has offered their Red One owners goes way beyond what other camera manufacturers are doing. I've never seen any other maker offer the kind of support that the Red team does, it's not even close. I'll take that over the cheezy HVX warranty I got that didn't even cover dust in the lens (known issue with camera).

Not to mention, i'll get a camera with a longer and better lens, more resolution and won't get ripped off on P2 cards, all for less than what I paid for my HVX.

 

[Dan Vance]

All issues aside, I am shocked as to how much penetration the RED One seems to have in such a short time frame.

Short? It's been 3 YEARS. The DVX100 had more penetration in 6 months, likewise the HVX. That's the downside of hyping a product long before it's been designed.

 

[Luis Caffesse]

Short? It's been 3 YEARS. The DVX100 had more penetration in 6 months, likewise the HVX. That's the downside of hyping a product long before it's been designed.

I don't think it's fair to compare the RED One penetration to that of the DVX or the HVX.
Completley different markets, and different users.
No one bought a RED One in lieu of a DVX or HVX.

The RED One should be compared to the cameras it was slated to compete against - namely the higher end of the HD market. People who bought the RED One are using it instead of something like the Sony F950, or even the Viper. The number of those cameras out there is much smaller than anything intended for a mass consumer base like the DVX or HVX.

On top of that add in the fact that this was a new company with zero track record.
Given those factors, I find it rather impressive that they've shipped as many units as they have in such a short time frame.

I know of more RED One's available for rent near me than I do of Sony F950s.
And honestly, I don't know where I'd go near me to rent a Viper.

I spoke to a friend in Hawaii recently who told me she'd been shooting commercials there on the RED - she said she knew of 8 units out there for rent from various sources. I thought was rather tellng.

And to be clear - it's been three years since RED was founded (2005)
They announced the RED One at Nab of 2006.
They shipped the first units at the end of August of 2007.

So it's been about a year since the camera has been available and in use.
So yeah, I think the way they've penetrated the marketplace in that timeframe to be impressive.

 

[pdsage10]

I don't think it's fair to compare the RED One penetration to that of the DVX or the HVX.

Exactly. Any soccer mom, film student or wedding videographer can afford a DVX, but not a RED. Trying to compare the penetration of RED and the DVX/HVX is like comparing the penetration of the Honda Accord to the Cadillac STS.

 

[Dan Vance]

I don't think it's fair to compare the RED One penetration to that of the DVX or the HVX.
Completley different markets, and different users.
No one bought a RED One in lieu of a DVX or HVX.

Don't confuse "penetration" with "number of units." DVX100 and HVX had significant market penetration in THEIR MARKET in 6 months. "Their market" is obviously a much bigger one. RED now has comparable market penetration in their market--but it took a lot longer.

And honestly, I don't know where I'd go near me to rent a Viper.

What's a Viper...?

And to be clear - it's been three years since RED was founded (2005)
They announced the RED One at Nab of 2006.
They shipped the first units at the end of August of 2007.

Now, come on, let's take some of the spin off that. It's been 3 years since RED was announced--what it would be. It's not like Jim started the company in 2005 and then sat around for a year going, hmm, what should we make...?

And according to what I've read, the first units shipped were all but unusable, and apparently even the current iteration still has serious issues.

So yeah, I think the way they've penetrated the marketplace in that timeframe to be impressive.

I AM impressed that they have such a strong following for a product that is essentially stiil in the prototype stage. Someday it will be a nice setup. Probably not this year.

 

[Luis Caffesse]

Don't confuse "penetration" with "number of units." DVX100 and HVX had significant market penetration in THEIR MARKET in 6 months. "Their market" is obviously a much bigger one. RED now has comparable market penetration in their market--but it took a lot longer.

Fair enough - so given that it's been a year since cameras were released RED has taken twice as long (by your numbers of 6 months, which I assume as a best guess) as established companies with a long history of marketing and brand awareness.

Still sounds impressive to me.

What's a Viper...?

Exactly.

Now, come on, let's take some of the spin off that. It's been 3 years since RED was announced--what it would be. It's not like Jim started the company in 2005 and then sat around for a year going, hmm, what should we make...?

If you're going to use that logic then there is no way the HVX had this huge market penetration you're talking about in 6 months time. The HVX was officially announced at NAB Apr 17, 2005. It was hinted at (and marketing began) even earlier than that.
It was released at the end of December in 2005, 8 months later. So which dates are we going by, announcement or release?

And according to what I've read, the first units shipped were all but unusable, and apparently even the current iteration still has serious issues.

And all I said was that I was impressed with the amount of market penetration they've gotten in such a short timeframe. I still think it's significant and I still think it's impressive. I never said anything about being impressed with a lack of issues.

I AM impressed that they have such a strong following for a product that is essentially stiil in the prototype stage. Someday it will be a nice setup. Probably not this year.

Whether or not it's 'ready for primetime' is another issue entirely to me.
But I don't think anyone can deny that they've had an impact on the industry.

EDITED TO ADD:
For the record, Dan is just trying to rile me up.

 

[Mattykins]

What's a Viper...?



And according to what I've read, the first units shipped were all but unusable, and apparently even the current iteration still has serious issues.

The Viper Cam is a 35mm format digital cinema camera. But I assume you were being sarcastic.

And now, I just got off set with a RED. The issues weren't as serious as you might read. We dropped one clip due to an internal fault. Though playback wasn't happening. She would crash when we tried to playback. Not problems that would steer me away from the red.

 

[Eagle-I]

How will a Scarlet perform in real world situations with no external hardware ? I mean in terms of the fact that it uses a single Compact Flash type card to record on - How much compression artifacts does it display versus P2. How does this compare to the P2 technology that uses a high-bitrate mini-raid array in the card ? Whats MR Greens take on this ?
Has anyone compared the Redcode codec to a DVCPro-HD codec in terms of final quality. I am interested in these camera for a remote apllication, so far the HPX-170 fits the bill perfectly.

 

[Barry_Green]

My take is like it always is -- we have to test it to see. I am very optimistic about the Scarlet. I was one of the original Red One owners, one of the first 400, and while the product at the time was not ready for prime time, it certainly delivered gorgeous imagery. Windows workflow and other issues led me to sell it, but once it's all sussed out I will probably get another one.

When Scarlet is a product, rather than a concept, I'll be thrilled to evaluate it for all potential uses. I plan on getting one. Whether it would replace an HPX170 or an HPX500 or an EX1 or something like that, I'm not so sure. But for $3,000 it's hard to see how one could go wrong. 180 fps, with 2K resolution, even if you only got it for special effects it'd still be a screaming deal.

 

[ProfessorU]

On paper, REDCode RAW blows DVCProHD out of the water in all areas except usability and file size. They are so fundamentally different that a comparison (other than a visual one) is unlikely.

 

[Eagle-I]

According to what Ive read on the red site REDCode RAW cannot be recorded to the on-camera CF card. It is too much for the card to swallow. It can only be recorded to an external high-speed device (Flash array, HD array etc). For the REDONE cam, REDcode28 (at 25fps max) is all they show as an option for on-cam recording to single CF card. This is for the RED One, but could it be assumed the Scarlet would be similar ? maybe more frame rates given the smaller sensor. I could easily be wrong on that since im a codec newbie.

 

[TheMusician]

You are a little off Eagle-I. If you want to record plain old RAW, then yes, you need a Raid setup to ingest it. If you want to shoot "Redcode" RAW, this is a proprietary format that has been optimized(mildly compressed) to be able to work with Compact Flash at multiple frame rates. This is how I understand it.

 

[kyle_doris]

i think i'd rather have a Scarlet than my HVX... they have very different features though, it's the case of two separate feature-sets. i even see this with the difference between the HVX and the HPX - and they have the same sensor.

i'd sacrafice a little bit of workflow time for 3k RAW on compact flash cards with FW800 out and a variety of other things that wouldn't be availible elsewhere.

the only thing with the scarlet is that i'm not holding my breath, when it comes it comes. until then, there are plenty of cameras (HPX170!) out there that are perfectly suited for for anything i'd do.

 

[lawriejaffa]

Meh, its just so much hype though isnt it - about the scarlet? It's like Barry said with his red, he got it, loved it, but ultimately had to sell it (work flow difficulties etc.)

So I mean the Scarlet has incredible sounding features, but im utterly and completely unconvinced that any remotely meaningful comparisons can be made, because not only does it not exist, but we have the evidence of those difficulties the Red has had on its release.

Scarlet is supposed to have an easy workflow for soccer mom apparently, but if it can deliver all that, at a modest price, then that would be sensational. I think if the Red operation was all cool, if there cams were utterly stable (or more) then id be less dubious about the Scarlet! But i do want it to succeed cos it sounds amazing!

 

[TheMusician]

Amen to that Kyle. There are a lot of good cameras available right now.

One thing that I seem to think everyone forgets is that Jim Janaard is hoping to not only sell these to professionals, but to "soccer moms" as he stated over on ScarletUser. If that is truly the case, I would not be surprised at all if they offered an in-camera downconvert to 1080p from the available 3K, which would aleviate most of the post-headaches. Just a thought.

 

[Justyn]

I didn't know Barry bought a Red and returned it. Was were the reasons? link to Barry's info?

 

[Barry_Green]

I didn't return it, I held on to it for about three months trying to figure a way to make it work, before ultimately deciding that it just wasn't ready (I was a very early reservation holder, #364, and things were different then). Plus, even though I worked the scene here to drum up jobs, the demand just wasn't there (outside of a some successful owner/ops in L.A.). Demand is a lot stronger now of course.

The image was shockingly delicious (and this is back on Build 13 & 14, before they upgraded to Build 16 and all the improvements that came with that!) But at the time the workflow was impossible for anyone but a Mac/FCP user, and even then it was far from ideal, and -- well, heck, even today, late-August, last I checked they still don't have what I would consider a functional Windows workflow for professional production yet (unless you want to spend $30,000 - $50,000 for an Assimilate Scratch system, which made no sense to me from a business perspective). Adobe support has been talked about, but has yet to materialize as far as I know.

For me it was all about a business decision. I got it, I loved the image, I hated the workflow compromises I was being asked to make (an hour to render a minute's footage before I could work with it? Not practical). So I was able to sell it and its lens for enough to profit enough to put both my daughters through college this year, which was a no-brainer. I decided that I would revisit the Red One when the workflow is totally sorted out, Red lenses are more available, and it's ready to really be put to work. And if the used market starts to bring the prices down (especially if there's sales pressure put on by the Red One owners who overextended themselves to buy a Red One but who would be better served by a Scarlet.)

That said, I understand that there are people working with it every day and that they're making it work. I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm saying that I was not willing to put up with the compromises it asked for, at the time, and in the state it was in at that time. I trust that by the time Scarlet is out this will all be sorted out and I'll be getting at least a Scarlet if not another Red One (on the used market though).

 

[Kenneth]

It's the Cinematographer

It's the Cinematographer

We talk about resolution, but it's the cinematographer, with his/her bag of tricks (lights, cranes, dollys, scrims, etc.) that make an image. Photography is just the recording of light bouncing off stuff.

So, sure, the new Red cameras are allgreat at capturing detail, but what is that detail made of? And would a night scene shot in the fog just look better shot on 16mm b&w film for the grain it adds and the mood it sets?

I would bet a cinematographer could do better with an HVX, the $3k for the Scarlet spent on lighitng equipment, and the $3k in camera periferals needed spent on some lighting classes. I bet that cinematographer's work would sing compared to the guy/gal who shoots a Scarlet without that equipment and knowledge.

Cinematographers have always been concerned with image capture, but the best know that the light on set makes the image. Give Steven Poster ASC an HVX with his lighting kit, and I bet he runs circles around any of us with a Scarlet, Red One or Epic.

I think there is a lot more to a quality image than the size of the chip.

That doesn't even take into consideration the story--what is the story being told and what look is best for it? (And is the story worth telling?)

A great film story shot on "lower res" equipment will score the audience every time over the top-quality image of a soulless movie.

Watch the Duplass Brothers' THE PUFFY CHAIR. The film got them in to Sundance, and they just released a second film, BAGHEAD. Puffy Chair is full of out of focus shots. They joke they won't win any cinematography awards. But the film has heart and a story, and audience (and the Sundance festival screeners) overlooked the technical deficiencies for great storytelling and acting.

And they work in Hollywood now. They have careers. (I guess this post is directed at the filmmakers here, who are writers and directors as well as cinematographers.)

Imagine bringing even HVX-quality footage to a great story--the audience is ready for it. They're waiting. Eagerly.

P.S. In the wedding industry, I see more cinematographers bringing flying crane shots to empty reception halls and dizzying shots spinning around groups of bridesmaids and groomsmen, but spinning the camera around them doesn't add any emotional content. It's all just show, without substance.

More wedding videographers are setting up all the shots, shooting the couple walking toward and away from them in slow motion in perfectly controlled images. That's all fine and good, but where's the reality? The emotion of the day? (That takes more skill to capture because you could miss it if you're not in control.)

We have to remember not to sacrifice content for style and high-res images. Emotions trump fancy camera chips every time. It's just the way it is. (But dammit if that emotional stuff isn't fleeting, and easily missed, and we do so love control.)

At what point is the art subjective and we have become so realistic, so sharp as to be too sharp? Maybe a little softness is good for the storyteller?

 

[Postmaster]

Amen!