Red Scarlet Announcement Info

So you want Jim to charge on a sliding scale based on your ability to afford the camera?
Click to expand...

That was clearly the implication when the Scarlet was announced and Red has only itself to blame. People complained about how the Canons, Panasonics and Sonys of the world conspired to cripple their little DSLRS so they wouldn't compete and destroy their upper echelon business. They said that if this monstrous companies stopped this insidious behavior we would all have baby Alexas in our hands to conquer the world of cinematography. And we are talking about $1000.00 cameras, for goodness sake! Then came Red's crusade about the democratization of cinematography for the masses of cinematographers left behind by the high cost of higher end equipment. A movie making magic box for $3k. Now Red is going to show what was obviously the only possible outcome of this new camera creation, this revolution invention: a camera that following the rules of reality cost thousands of dollars and will be way out of the reach of the same people that complained that the big companies were crippling their little $1K DSLRs. At this moment in time the lower end of the market, full of dreams and aspiration but short of thousand of dollars in their pockets, should get up and applaud Panasonic for the GH2 and Canon and Sony for their affordable camera line. They are real revolutionaries for the people who dream of filmmaking. In addition Red should just shut up and stop spreading the nonsense about 1080p that only ads insult to injury for the many people that will not be able to spend thousands of dollars in a new camera but still have dreams.
 
androbot2084 said:
The Red Revolution is about affordable high definition for the masses.
Click to expand...
Says who? Red says that they make digital cinema cameras for professionals. There's nothing that I've seen in their mission statement that says that they are for "the masses", or that they're "affordable."

Look at the tab on www.red.com/history and you'll see exactly what the Red Revolution is all about:
Jim Jannard, the owner and founder of sportswear and sunglass icon, Oakley, set out to realize his ultimate quest, to build the world's best cameras
Click to expand...
 
From where I stand the only thing that seems important about RED to me is how far ahead of the curve they are. As far as I can tell the game is tightening up and I believe the only thing that matters when the dust settles is not who is better, but whether or not any price differential vs. extra bells and whistles warrants paying upwards.

After all, that is really the only kind of estimation that we can make sitting behind our computers on Nov. 3.

I mean, who among us is actually going to trust the promo videos to judge the quality of the output?

It's not until more people get these cameras in their hands will we really be able to make a serious judgement call.

I for one am not going to drop +10K on a camera without trying it out first, whether it's Jim Jannard, Stupiflex Inc. or J.J. Walker trying to sell me something.
 
But there was no way that Jim could have produced the ultimate movie making camera for $3000. For one thing it wouldn't be 4K and it would only have a fixed lens. Now if he had introduced a camera and charged poor film makers $3000 while charging the rich established film makers $300,000 he would have had a lot of leeway.
 
Personally I think there's too many good options around to waste time complaining about the fact that, in the end, Scarlet might be too expensive for some (me included). And frankly someone who can afford a GH2 or 60D could find (and complain?) a 6/7k Scarlet shooting package too expensive as well. In the end if "raw" doesn't happen for sub 10k in 2011 it will happen a few years down the line. And I bet not too far down. I don't think anyone's filmmaking aspirations are broken. The choices are plenty and at all kinds of price range.

Plus if you wanna shoot a movie...well, the camera, especially nowadays, is really the last thing to worry about:)
 
androbot2084 said:
But there was no way that Jim could have produced the ultimate movie making camera for $3000. For one thing it wouldn't be 4K and it would only have a fixed lens. Now if he had introduced a camera and charged poor film makers $3000 while charging the rich established film makers $300,000 he would have had a lot of leeway.
Click to expand...
Jim is profoundly *not* interested in making "the ultimate movie making camera for $3000 for poor film makers." He is interested in building the best possible products he can, and charging as much as the market will bear.

This is a guy who made his fortune by selling $200 sunglasses, fer pete's sake.

I would suggest that anyone who's still clinging to "3K for $3K" is deluding themselves and really, really, really, really, really should just let it go.

And for those who refuse to let it go, buy a JVC. They have 4K for 0.8k already.

Jim told everyone a year ago -- "man up" and pay the price. He isn't going to go after the no-budget crowd. He has no interest in that at all. He's going to make professional products and charge professional prices for them. If you can't pay those prices, move on -- get something else.

What's hard about that to understand?
 
Centro said:
Personally I think there's too many good options around to waste time complaining about the fact that, in the end, Scarlet might be too expensive for some (me included). And frankly someone who can afford a GH2 or 60D could find (and complain?) a 6/7k Scarlet shooting package too expensive as well. In the end if "raw" doesn't happen for sub 10k in 2011 it will happen a few years down the line. And I bet not too far down. I don't think anyone's filmmaking aspirations are broken. The choices are plenty and at all kinds of price range.

Plus if you wanna shoot a movie...well, the camera, especially nowadays, is really the last thing to worry about:)
Click to expand...
Absolutely 10,00)% agreed.
 
Scarlet like all other RED products have been sold as "professional" from the beginning, not for soccer moms like DSLR's are (Jims words). Now few days ago Jim told that "Scarlet is now professional camera. Price goes up". btw the price of Scarlet has gone up around 5 times. It's pretty clear that while other manufacturers announce products when they are finished, RED announces ideas for products that might come in the future.
 
I agree with everything you said in this post, but what does the following quote refer to?

quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Barry_Green
And for those who refuse to let it go, buy a JVC. They have 4K for 0.8k already.
Click to expand...

It refers to a 4K camera for cheap. It just doesn't have a large sensor in the sense of today's post DSLR world.
 
John Caballero said:
That was clearly the implication when the Scarlet was announced and Red has only itself to blame. People complained about how the Canons, Panasonics and Sonys of the world conspired to cripple their little DSLRS so they wouldn't compete and destroy their upper echelon business. They said that if this monstrous companies stopped this insidious behavior we would all have baby Alexas in our hands to conquer the world of cinematography. And we are talking about $1000.00 cameras, for goodness sake!

Then came Red's crusade about the democratization of cinematography for the masses of cinematographers left behind by the high cost of higher end equipment. A movie making magic box for $3k. Now Red is going to show what was obviously the only possible outcome of this new camera creation, this revolution invention: a camera that following the rules of reality cost thousands of dollars and will be way out of the reach of the same people that complained that the big companies were crippling their little $1K DSLRs.

At this moment in time the lower end of the market, full of dreams and aspiration but short of thousand of dollars in their pockets, should get up and applaud Panasonic for the GH2 and Canon and Sony for their affordable camera line. They are real revolutionaries for the people who dream of filmmaking.

In addition Red should just shut up and stop spreading the nonsense about 1080p that only ads insult to injury for the many people that will not be able to spend thousands of dollars in a new camera but still have dreams.
Click to expand...

You could've found a nicer way to put the very last sentence, but the paragraph right before that's probably the best post I've read from you in years.
 
is an unreliable camera that becomes unresponsive in the middle of a shoot professional ?

can your audience really tell the difference between something shot on a red vs something shot on a gh2 / 5d / hvx 200 ? and do they care ?

i would hazard that the answer to these questions is no.
 
Reflex Films said:
can your audience really tell the difference between something shot on a red vs something shot on a gh2 / 5d / hvx 200 ? and do they care ?
Click to expand...

It depends who your audience are, and 8/10 times, no one will notice until you point it out to them. But there is definitely a standard that a lot of people are use to, that's why these expensive camera's are still used.
 
Last edited:
Reflex Films said:
can your audience really tell the difference between something shot on a red vs something shot on a gh2 / 5d / hvx 200 ? and do they care ?
Click to expand...

I'll bet money that, if all lighting situations were created equal, an audience in a theater can tell if the camera used was a of a sub-cinema standard quality or not. They may not be able to say what it is or why, but they would notice it.

Whether it matters or not is a different story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top