FS7: RED Scarlet-W

Not seen that one before but it's the same as the others so far. Nothing special about it whatsoever. At least this one is exposed more evenly and the skies aren't all blown out but the plonking of a film emulation lut over everything doesn't help. Plus it looks soft but that may well be the use of Hoya filters. But then ask why you would use Hoya filters if testing a camera. It's been underexposed to preserve highlights which s great but the lut contrast hasn't been corrected and so the black are too crushed in general.

I wait to see what someone can do with it when actually using lights and controlling a scene.
 
It's funny, but due to the Mini Ursa , despite it being vapour ware, it was the reason I believe Reds price of the Scarlet W is so competitive. Just like what Red did with Epic prices on the release of the F55 , it's happened again with SW. So whatever we think of the BM offering we should be grateful (even though I own a SD.)

In regards to all the craptacular mini Ursa 4.5k footage I can't help but think when it goes live Phil Baldson will be doing some stuff ...in fact I bet he his working on it right now. Until then all this test footage reinforces the need for light and it is iimportantance or for many the lack of it.
 
I don't agree with that at all. Blackmagic haven't ever taken a camera purchase away from Red. They don't even vaguely operate in the same sphere. Red have responded to the Alexa Mini and the C300 Mk2 - pretty much undercutting one by half and rendering the other obsolete before it is even released..

Scarlet was always going to come in around that price as Red completely restructured their entire lineup with a full roster of DSMC2 cameras - it was just a question of feature set.

Agh... Every time I think I'm out, they pull me back in....
 
All these arguments about which camera is better are ridiculous, the truth is in capable hands all of them can do amazing things. I see partisanship on an extraordinary level here. Most people in the end are trying to justify there own reasoning for personally investing in a camera. But being on the receiving end of a lot of footage, not many people listen to me when I tell them where the limits are for many of the cameras they are using. They just want me to fix something.

So, I will say it again. The cameras we are using are disposable. They will be laughed at a few years from now, what counts are good support equipment, good technique (especially lighting) and most of all an artistic signature or really personalized point of view towards the subject matter. The latter being the most important. That will bring in more bucks more than any piece of equipment.

I am quite sure the BM 4.6 mini ursa will be a good camera, as the FS7 is, and the Scarlet Weapon eventually too. I have a pretty good idea of how they each render (or will probably render in post based on their predecessors), including both their strength and the weaknesses, though the new ursa may surprise me.

The only reasoning behind purchase of any of this equipment that makes any sense is how easily it enables productivity. From what I can see, none of these cameras will hold their value for any significant period of time. Two to three years from now, they will all be toast. From the point of view of investment there is only one that seems to reasonably keep it's value and you all know which one that is. Its not one of these three and it is darned expensive. It's also one of the simplest to use. This bears reflection. In my opinion you might as well just look at your next purchase like a hammer on your workbench. The one you pick up the most isn't necessarily the latest and greatest, it's the one you are most comfortable with and which enables you to do what you need to do without thinking too much about it. That is probably the wisest investment you can make, but most of the time the truth is, you don't know until it's actually in your hands, do you?
 
Last edited:
Buy the camera that will allow you to pay your bills. UNless you don't need it to.

I always use the analogy of it being a hammer. It's perfectly apt for us at almost every level.

Look. We've agreed on something!

Oh, and it's not being partisan to say you talk bollocks about Dragon skintones ;)
 
Ben Scott said:
Buy the camera that will allow you to pay your bills. UNless you don't need it to.

I always use the analogy of it being a hammer. It's perfectly apt for us at almost every level.

Look. We've agreed on something!
Click to expand...

Procuctivity and paying the bills are not necessarily the same thing, but close enough.
So yes I gess you could say we defnitely agree on this. :-)

Oh, and it's not being partisan to say you talk bollocks about Dragon skintones ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks I will keep that in mind the next time I have to do a bunch of secondaries on a Dragon face because they used the low light OLPF in a dimly lit scene.:violin:
 
Last edited:
Meh, I do secondaries on most footage when I have the time.

But if you haven't exposed properly you haven't exposed properly.
 
I'd like to take a poll who's realistically doing secondaries on anything other than 1.) budgeted feature film work 2.) commercial spots for big brands / conglomerates.
 
yoclay said:
All these arguments about which camera is better are ridiculous, the truth is in capable hands all of them can do amazing things. I see partisanship on an extraordinary level here. Most people in the end are trying to justify there own reasoning for personally investing in a camera. But being on the receiving end of a lot of footage, not many people listen to me when I tell them where the limits are for many of the cameras they are using. They just want me to fix something.

So, I will say it again. The cameras we are using are disposable. They will be laughed at a few years from now, what counts are good support equipment, good technique (especially lighting) and most of all an artistic signature or really personalized point of view towards the subject matter. The latter being the most important. That will bring in more bucks more than any piece of equipment.

I am quite sure the BM 4.6 mini ursa will be a good camera, as the FS7 is, and the Scarlet Weapon eventually too. I have a pretty good idea of how they each render (or will probably render in post based on their predecessors), including both their strength and the weaknesses, though the new ursa may surprise me.

The only reasoning behind purchase of any of this equipment that makes any sense is how easily it enables productivity. From what I can see, none of these cameras will hold their value for any significant period of time. Two to three years from now, they will all be toast. From the point of view of investment there is only one that seems to reasonably keep it's value and you all know which one that is. Its not one of these three and it is darned expensive. It's also one of the simplest to use. This bears reflection. In my opinion you might as well just look at your next purchase like a hammer on your workbench. The one you pick up the most isn't necessarily the latest and greatest, it's the one you are most comfortable with and which enables you to do what you need to do without thinking too much about it. That is probably the wisest investment you can make, but most of the time the truth is, you don't know until it's actually in your hands, do you?
Click to expand...

Of course, good technique and artistry are most important, and we don't discuss those things enough, but I think it's OK to have an opinion about different cameras on a camera forum.

I have to disagree with your analogy of a hammer though. Cameras are nothing like hammers. No one asks a carpenter if he's using a Bosch or a Black and Decker; to a client, it's a hammer. A hammer never finds it's way onto an invoice. Plus, the hammer will last for years, but cameras as you rightly point out are becoming somewhat disposable - just as well they are coming down in price.
 
If honest I tend to use chisel as my tool of choice. You use the right one for the job. Not all are equal. None are as important as the person wielding it. And Red's chisel obviously has something wrong with its cutting edge.
 
Red Raven price and fake 4.5K (16x9 is only 4k) is clearly a response of red to Blackmagic Proposition which is impresive. I agree I'm still waiting for ungraded footage but for the mayority of potencial buyer URSA mini 4.6k is the best value for money RAW camera with desent DR. I won't be surprice if by this time next year for every RAVEN sold BMD would had sold twice or more as much URSA Minis 4.6K. if that happen definilty a few impressive URSA4.6K films will be come up.





Ben Scott said:
I don't agree with that at all. Blackmagic haven't ever taken a camera purchase away from Red. They don't even vaguely operate in the same sphere. Red have responded to the Alexa Mini and the C300 Mk2 - pretty much undercutting one by half and rendering the other obsolete before it is even released..

Scarlet was always going to come in around that price as Red completely restructured their entire lineup with a full roster of DSMC2 cameras - it was just a question of feature set.

Agh... Every time I think I'm out, they pull me back in....
Click to expand...
 
Liam Hall said:
I have to disagree with your analogy of a hammer though. Cameras are nothing like hammers. No one asks a carpenter if he's using a Bosch or a Black and Decker; to a client, it's a hammer. A hammer never finds it's way onto an invoice. Plus, the hammer will last for years, but cameras as you rightly point out are becoming somewhat disposable - just as well they are coming down in price.
Click to expand...

And as well, hammers are relatively cheap. A professional craftsman can afford to own lots of different types and pick the exact best one for every task. If a particular one doesn't work out, you can lay it aside and choose another with little consequence. Very few of us have more than one or two different cameras, and it's a commitment that you need to stick with for awhile because of the cost.

Plus, it doesn't take a lot of study to learn how to use a new type of hammer correctly.

- Greg
 
AndreyBlanco said:
Red Raven price and fake 4.5K (16x9 is only 4k) is clearly a response of red to Blackmagic Proposition which is impresive. I agree I'm still waiting for ungraded footage but for the mayority of potencial buyer URSA mini 4.6k is the best value for money RAW camera with desent DR. I won't be surprice if by this time next year for every RAVEN sold BMD would had sold twice or more as much URSA Minis 4.6K. if that happen definilty a few impressive URSA4.6K films will be come up.
Click to expand...

Have you used one? Or this all based on paper specs and watching vids like the one posted above? BM doesn't compete in the same market as Red. Maybe one day but not yet. I welcome that day. Raven is a fun adventure for Red and I think it will do very well for them in the market they intend it, which is not the same one as the Ursa.I wouldn't be surprised if Ursamini outsells Raven too, because it is BM's flagship low budget camera. And Raven is a more specialist tool. Like saying I won't be surprised if GoPro outsells Alexa.

The idea that their future rests on that market or even on Raven sales is laughable. It is their entry level b cam and gimbal cam. Their Alexa mini if you will. Their 'real' cameras shoot Transformers!

Also, value for money is not the only reason people buy a product. Unless they are just starting out or unless they have no money. People pay a premium for those final 30/20/10% improvements in IQ.

As as for a few impressive Ursa films... I would genuinely settle for one.
 
what do you called Market?
Film Market? Let me remind you no red camera were used on oscars nonimated film this year. At sundace blackmagic almost match red.
Market Share? If Blackmagic outsell red who win this one?

I own and like RED cameras but that doesn't mean I will defend them until dead. I welcome cameras like URSA mini 4.6K and if more poeple used them increase the chances that a few succesfull low budget film will use them. At the end IMHO camera brand only influence less than 10% of any production.


Ben Scott said:
Have you used one? Or this all based on paper specs and watching vids like the one posted above? BM doesn't compete in the same market as Red. Maybe one day but not yet. I welcome that day. Raven is a fun adventure for Red and I think it will do very well for them in the market they intend it, which is not the same one as the Ursa.I wouldn't be surprised if Ursamini outsells Raven too, because it is BM's flagship low budget camera. And Raven is a more specialist tool. Like saying I won't be surprised if GoPro outsells Alexa.

The idea that their future rests on that market or even on Raven sales is laughable. It is their entry level b cam and gimbal cam. Their Alexa mini if you will. Their 'real' cameras shoot Transformers!

Also, value for money is not the only reason people buy a product. Unless they are just starting out or unless they have no money. People pay a premium for those final 30/20/10% improvements in IQ.

As as for a few impressive Ursa films... I would genuinely settle for one.
Click to expand...
 
Could someone offer a me a concise breakdown (in layman terms) of what purpose the different Red bodies serve?
So many that i cant keep up as a casual observer!
Im guessing they each cover different applications but I'm confused about which does what
 
You're using Oscars to make point about something? Really? What do they have to do with anything? Also how many BM shot films had a theatrical release last year?

The market for Raven is not the 'my first proper camera' market which is where BM lives. It's the one above that. Scarlet is essentially the new Epic.

I defend no camera either but in he spirit of helping clear up confusion I have contributed to the conversation when talk turns to one of the few things I feel I have the experience and knowledge to comment on here. As I repeatedly say I would love the Ursa mini to be amazing and I would love BM to be a player on the main stage of production but they are nowhere near. I do not know a single person at my level- and that is not a particularly high level at all in the grand scheme of things - who would ever use one except as aPOVcam or crash cam.

I look forward to them getting it right.
 
Personally, I like the BM look. I think they have a nice color science. However, everything else about BM cameras are pretty terrible - strange body design, bad customer service, un-reliable, always have had major glitches upon release. but people put up with the major shortcomings just because of price.

So while BM's image / color science is arguably on the same level as Red and Sony, their cameras are quite behind in many other aspects, hence the cheap price.
 
Usra mini 4.5k could be fine if it delivers what they say it does ......if?

However the sleeper with this camera is its huge data footprint when shooting raw . Plus you also need to back up the data say 2 to 3 times .......contributing to a sizeable post cost which many cannot recognise.

Ps. Yep Red not represented in the Oscars but represented in the top grossing films for 2014 of course 2nded by a huge margin Arri Alexa .
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top