Red Scarlet footage anyone?

I'm quite intrigued to see how 2K footage from Scarlet (or Epic) handles. At roughly a quarter of the data rate of 4K, I wonder how much more manageable it would be post-wise. I do love the idea of RAW footage, it's the hassle of dealing with it at 4K/5K that puts me off.
 
Grug said:
I'm quite intrigued to see how 2K footage from Scarlet (or Epic) handles. At roughly a quarter of the data rate of 4K, I wonder how much more manageable it would be post-wise. I do love the idea of RAW footage, it's the hassle of dealing with it at 4K/5K that puts me off.
Click to expand...
Well, if you don't mind a 3.24 crop factor (meaning your 50 just became a 162mm), be my guest. Of course it would be more manageable. But forget any wide shots (10mm just became 32mm).
 
dustylense said:
Well, if you don't mind a 3.24 crop factor (meaning your 50 just became a 162mm), be my guest. Of course it would be more manageable. But forget any wide shots (10mm just became 32mm).
Click to expand...

Mmm, that is just a too big of a deal breaker for me.
 
Grug said:
I'm quite intrigued to see how 2K footage from Scarlet (or Epic) handles. At roughly a quarter of the data rate of 4K, I wonder how much more manageable it would be post-wise. I do love the idea of RAW footage, it's the hassle of dealing with it at 4K/5K that puts me off.
Click to expand...

Filesizes are definitely a consideration. But remember - RED shoots compressed RAW. The Scarlet is compressing at a ratio of 6:1 in these shots (I believe)...imagine if it wasn't and you had to deal with six times the data.
 
dustylense said:
This camera is RELEASED and I've seen 50 times the footage from the C300. Whats going on here? How come nobody that ordered has posted anything. 1 guy, 1 cam, 1 minute 30 seconds.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind the version that's been out there is the PL mount version...with the EOS release now I think more of the type of people who would post footage will be getting their hands on a Scarlet...
 
dustylense said:
Well, if you don't mind a 3.24 crop factor (meaning your 50 just became a 162mm), be my guest. Of course it would be more manageable. But forget any wide shots (10mm just became 32mm).
Click to expand...

That's not quite what I mean. I'm interested to see how 2K RAW footage handles in post, with a view to seeing how the workflow would work with a 'native' S35mm 2K RAW camera.

From all of the 4K cinema projections I've now seen, I simply can't see enough visible difference from 2K/1080p projection to justify the added time, hassle and expense of a 4K workflow. However I would imagine that a 2K version of the same RAW workflow, would be a far less painful experience, whilst giving you all the benefits of RAW footage.

Michael Olsen said:
Filesizes are definitely a consideration. But remember - RED shoots compressed RAW. The Scarlet is compressing at a ratio of 6:1 in these shots (I believe)...imagine if it wasn't and you had to deal with six times the data.
Click to expand...

For me compressed RAW is a given, I can appreciate the theoretical benefits it offers - but realistically, they mean nothing to me in practical shooting terms.
 
Grug said:
That's not quite what I mean. I'm interested to see how 2K RAW footage handles in post, with a view to seeing how the workflow would work with a 'native' S35mm 2K RAW camera.
Click to expand...

I think what dustylense is trying to say is that you can't get a S35mm size 2K raw image out of the Scarlet. Scarlet's 2K image is taken from a window frame of the sensor, effective a 3.24 crop. Scarlet only outputs S35mm size as 4K Raw. I think this has been discussed to death, so if you're already clear on the process, my apologies.
 
dustylense said:
Well, if you don't mind a 3.24 crop factor (meaning your 50 just became a 162mm), be my guest. Of course it would be more manageable. But forget any wide shots (10mm just became 32mm).
Click to expand...

Where are you getting 3.24 from? It doubles not triples or quadruples. A 50mm becomes a 100mm at 2k.
 
cowpunk52 said:
I think what dustylense is trying to say is that you can't get a S35mm size 2K raw image out of the Scarlet. Scarlet's 2K image is taken from a window frame of the sensor, effective a 3.24 crop. Scarlet only outputs S35mm size as 4K Raw. I think this has been discussed to death, so if you're already clear on the process, my apologies.
Click to expand...

No, I understand that perfectly. I'm talking about a hypothetical 2K RAW S35mm camera.

Obviously Alexa does that with off-board recording (but uncompressed RAW footage), and the SI-2K does it (but with a 2/3" sensor and less compression than Redcode - and therefore has proportionally higher data rates).
 
Actually, not my mistake. If you read on and quoted from your link.
"FFor instance if you wanted to shoot some slow motion at 2k with a 50mm lens and then capture some 24fps at 4k with the same frame you would use a 162mm lens, which would likely only exist in a zoom."

A 50mm is still a 50mm last I checked.
 
Last edited:
2k format on Scarlet/Epic/Red 1 is slightly larger than standard 16mm camera frame and can be covered with 16mm or S16mm lenses. Nice option for run and gun shooting with a fast wide range zoom.
 
Kevin Marshall said:
Yes, but If you're trying to keep the same field of view between different sensor sizes, you need different focal lengths (or different distance to subject)
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure everyone understands that. What I'm trying to say here is that if you want a 50mm (FULL FRAME) view 60fps 2k image out of scarlet you're going to be in for a shock. That will be a 15mm lens to have the FOV of 50mm (full frame). Thats quite a compromise, seeing that every other EPIC video posted on Vimeo is slow motion.
So now, you're going to be adapting 2/3's and 1/3's lenses to Scarlet? Just for 60fps or a 1080 image. Damn, I thought working with 4/3's was a challenge. Wanna borrow my Lumix 20mm 1.7? Which will be a 64.8 on the Scarlet. It's a 40mm on my Gh2 and af100. Slow mo isn't looking so great on Scarlet in my mind if your looking for wide.
 
dustylense said:
Actually, not my mistake. If you read on and quoted from your link.
"FFor instance if you wanted to shoot some slow motion at 2k with a 50mm lens and then capture some 24fps at 4k with the same frame you would use a 162mm lens, which would likely only exist in a zoom."

A 50mm is still a 50mm last I checked.
Click to expand...

At 5k, a 50mm (FF) lens has the field of view of a 65mm. At 2k it's 162mm or 2.5x the 65mm it is at 5k.

I'm basically agreeing with you, just pointing out how I'm seeing the calculations happening.

50mm lens 35 Full Frame == 65mm FoV at 5k (on Epic or Scarlet) == 80mm FoV at 4k (on Epic or Scarlet) == 162mm FoV at 2k (on Epic or Scarlet).


RedScarletXDataSheet_1k.png


Thus a 162mm FoV is 2.5x that of a 65mm.
 
Last edited:
Andrew McCarrick said:
At 5k, a 50mm (FF) lens has the field of view of a 65mm. At 2k it's 162mm or 2.5x the 65mm it is at 5k.

I'm basically agreeing with you, just pointing how I'm seeing the calculations happen.

50mm lens 35 Full Frame == 65mm FoV at 5k (on Epic or Scarlet) == 80mm FoV at 4k (on Epic or Scarlet) == 162mm FoV at 2k (on Epic or Scarlet).
Click to expand...
Agreed. See the problems that just 60FPS is giving now on Scarlet? 60fps 1080 video! Not 120! 60! 1080! Af100 and fs100 look kinda good don't they? Now go Vimeo RED Epic footage. Like I said, every 2 out of 3 of them will be 60fps or slower. I know I know, RED RAW. REDRUM REDRUM.....images.jpg
 
Morox said:
I find it mildly disturbing that people will drop $10,000+ on a camera that has zero reviews or ample footage let alone testing/renting the equipment first.
Click to expand...

There's plenty of sample footage out there. It's an Epic. Sensor, image processing, firmware, accessory modules, viewfinders, all identical. It has less bandwidth. That's it. Oh, also the dumb side body panel is different and it's grey instead of black.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top