SCARLET by Red Digital Cinema

[Ian-T]

Taking a page from my experience of working with RAW files from small P&S cameras. The quality of the sensor overwhelmingly determines the latitude of the resulting image. My Ricoh GRD has a RAW mode and the RAW images from it can not stand up to JPEGs from my Canon 5D when editing in photoshop. Not even close.

I suspect it to be the same case when it comes to Scarlet 2/3 vs 5D2..

Well of course the sensor will determine the latitude. I'm sure it helps a great deal when shooting. That's one of the benefits. I mean, in the end. I think we all want a cam that can give us more detail in the dark and light areas. But, as with any camera, if you are careful with your shots for any given scene..then the benefits of latitude would be equal (IMO) during post production. What I mean is...if you are able to capture similar types of pictures with a higher and a lower sensor camera...then what matters most in post is the type of compression originally used to capture the picture. Because once you start tweaking...then compression ugliness starts to rear its ugly head. So in the case of a Scarlet vs th D5...guess which one will start to degrade quicker? This is just my opinion. I have no real world experience with either...they are both not out at the moment anyways.

Edit: Fact is..I just might eventually get a D5...who knows. But there are things that I still can't overlook.

[booggerg]

What I mean is...if you are able to capture similar types of pictures with a higher and a lower sensor camera...then what matters most in post is the type of compression originally used to capture the picture. Because once you start tweaking...then compression ugliness starts to rear its ugly head. So in the case of a Scarlet vs th D5...guess which one will start to degrade quicker? This is just my opinion. I have no real world experience with either...they are both not out at the moment anyways.

A tiny 2/3 sensor will not be able to capture the same image data as 5D's FF sensor. That is the same reason why a FF Red cost $12000 whereas a 2/3 sensor model costs $2500. (Both uses the same codec btw)

Everyone is hyping up the RAW feature of the Scarlet. I just want to bring the rhetoric down to earth a bit because from my experience and I'm sure other experienced people will agree, the sensor itself is most important aspect. As long as the codec from a large sensor is not $hit, it will beat out RAW from a tiny sensor by an EPIC margin.

BTW, from all that we've seen from the RED ONE, with its S35 sensor that is not suited to shoot in high ISO, what gives you confidence that the scarlet 2/3 small sensor will be good in low light/high gain?

[Ian-T]

BTW, from all that we've seen from the RED ONE, with its S35 sensor that is not suited to shoot in high ISO, what gives you confidence that the scarlet 2/3 small sensor will be good in low light/high gain?

..um...where did you see me say that? You have been responding to me, responding to Braceface. I was not pointing my comments on any of the camera's hypothetical performances..I just gave possible scenarios of latitude and post work that could apply to any camera. Heck..I've been very neutral in my comments toward both cameras. I've even made it a point to state that one or both don't really exist at the moment. I'm enjoying reading other people's POV when it comes to this or that...but it's funny how some folks get so worked up about something they don't even own...especially when one of the products is more of a concept. I can't get into it like that... Sorry but my confidence lies elsewhere..

[spideralex90]

BTW, from all that we've seen from the RED ONE, with its S35 sensor that is not suited to shoot in high ISO, what gives you confidence that the scarlet 2/3 small sensor will be good in low light/high gain?

Really now. Got any proof? If you were trying to say it won't be as good then yes i understand that, but saying it's not good in general is quite a large statement.

[Braceface]

Well,
The Scarlet will probably be a pretty good camera. Even the Scarlet with the 2/3 sensor has nice specs. I don't see a point myself, at this time in mimicking 16mm film if you can mimic 35mm film, and use 35mm lenses. The Mark II is more valuable than the low end Scarlet for somebody who wants the film look. I wish people would stop comparing the low end Scarlet to the Red One. It AINT that.

[Braceface]

Really now. Got any proof? If you were trying to say it won't be as good then yes i understand that, but saying it's not good in general is quite a large statement.

I agree with you about needing proof on that. I thought the Red One is supposed to handle low light " pretty good" at least. Not like the Mark II, but...

[Ian-T]

A tiny 2/3 sensor will not be able to capture the same image data as 5D's FF sensor. That is the same reason why a FF Red cost $12000 whereas a 2/3 sensor model costs $2500. (Both uses the same codec btw)

Everyone is hyping up the RAW feature of the Scarlet. I just want to bring the rhetoric down to earth a bit because from my experience and I'm sure other experienced people will agree, the sensor itself is most important aspect. As long as the codec from a large sensor is not $hit, it will beat out RAW from a tiny sensor by an EPIC margin.

Ok. But in the end it's still only a 1920x1080 camera. Just like Mattais and Duke schooled me a couple of weeks ago about the D90 being only a 1k camera (despite it having a large sensor)...this cam is also limited...but to a 1920x1080 size. I think the difference between it and the hypothetical Scarlet is...that Scarlet will output a bigger picture. It supposedly will have software to work in it's larger size (I'm not sure). Am I wrong in thinking this way?

[Ian-T]

I wish people would stop comparing the low end Scarlet to the Red One. It AINT that.

Yeah I know...they speculate that it will make a nicer picture. What nice means...I don't know..

[lordtangent]

Chuckle all you want. Then go read the reduser forum and cry. There is a backlash bigger than the Sarah Palin debacle. They just made a lot of enemies from friends based on a slogan that they launched their entire company based on. ( which was dumb in the first place).... Good luck with your Red products. I wont pay for a camera the price of a nice car if I know it will become obsolete, but hey, do what you have to man.

Any r1 owner who get's pissed about their r1 getting "obsoleted" is pretty clueless. Red is offering a FULL CREDIT towards the upgrade to an Epic. What camera company in history has ever done something like that? It's totally unprecedented.

[Braceface]

I don't think you're wrong Ian, but on the cheaper Scarlet model, it isn't that attractive even with that unless you are somewhere very curious, like, needing to shoot for the big screen ALL of the time, and still not having a big enough budget for the Epic.
To me this is the big flaw. Any Scarlet below the 35mm version probably wont sell as good as people are thinking. When it's seriously time to put the money where the mouth is, 35mm sensors WILL be on people's minds more than 3K, in my estimation.
I don't even WANT that kind of power until it's cheaper, and more practical for me to edit. I have a hard enough time with 1080 TBQH.
The epic, however...... amazing camera. I still wouldn't buy it in this particular era of technologic breakthroughs happening so rapidly. Bad investment. (IMO)

[Braceface]

Any r1 owner who get's pissed about their r1 getting "obsoleted" is pretty clueless. Red is offering a FULL CREDIT towards the upgrade to an Epic. What camera company in history has ever done something like that? It's totally unprecedented.

That's funny cause, in January ,Bush ,will also be unpresidented.

[Braceface]

By the way, the Redforum posts have dropped off like a High-school prom dress.
We're talking more about the Scarlet here, than they are there at the moment.
Hmmm.......

[Ian-T]

By the way, the Redforum posts have dropped off like a High-school prom dress.
We're talking more about the Scarlet here, than they are there at the moment.
Hmmm.......

LOL...but they still got your attention...

ok....I couldn't resit that one...

[Braceface]

Haha,
I book-marked the sight for the release of the specs. Now I just monitor what I see as the slowly building backlash against the lower ending Scarlets, or even the existance of them. They might as well just build the damn Epics and call it a day. Terrible answer to the DSLR excitement out there, and only 16mm dof, to boot.

[lordtangent]

That's funny cause, in January ,Bush ,will also be unpresidented.

???

Well, another thing to consider is the new cameras wont be shipping until next year also. R1 owners had plenty of time with their cameras before the new cams ship.

[booggerg]

Ok. But in the end it's still only a 1920x1080 camera. Just like Mattais and Duke schooled me a couple of weeks ago about the D90 being only a 1k camera (despite it having a large sensor)...this cam is also limited...but to a 1920x1080 size. I think the difference between it and the hypothetical Scarlet is...that Scarlet will output a bigger picture. It supposedly will have software to work in it's larger size (I'm not sure). Am I wrong in thinking this way?

I can buy a cheap $200 P&S that will give me a 12MP picture. But my 4 years old Canon 1DMK2 is still producing much much better image at 8MP.. Heck i'll go back to an old Canon EOS D60 with 6MP sensor and it still produces better image than the modern P&S with 12MP... get my point?

Image resolution is not related to image quality. Pixel/Sensor size is related to image quality.

[Ian-T]

I can buy a cheap $200 P&S that will give me a 12MP picture. But my 4 years old Canon 1DMK2 is still producing much much better image at 8MP.. Heck i'll go back to an old Canon EOS D60 with 6MP sensor and it still produces better image than the modern P&S with 12MP... get my point?
.

...ok. But i thought we were specifically talking about video?

[booggerg]

...ok. But i thought we were specifically talking about video?

still, video.. sensor technology and performance trend is the same for both..

I'm only using the still digital camera analogy because they've been around for a while and we all know what to expect from them.

Once again: Image resolution is not related to image quality. Pixel/Sensor size is related to image quality.

To believe Scarlet has better IQ because of its 3K resolution is like believing that a 12MP P&S digicam produces better image than a 6MP DSLR..

[Braceface]

I agree totally - i was talking purely from technical standpoint. HV20 DOF is good enough for me in most situations... sometimes though i'd like just that little bit of extra ;-)

***********************

I guess i shouldn't do this, but here we go anyway... i uploaded some shots from paid jobs i've done with HV20. A "demoreel" of the HV20 stuff i happened to have on my machine right now, if you may.

There's some footage from low budget commercials, plus footage from a feature film's DVD extras. I don't really want this to be publicly available, so i will remove this link in a day or so. After that, if someone's interested, i can give the link privately (PM me).

http://eki.pp.fi/HV20_demo_v001.mpg
(720*408p mpeg1, 4 minutes, about 90 MB, no sound)

Most of the stuff is without adapter (sometimes using the variable ND trick from my sig.) There's one commercial i shot using my DIY 35mm adapter - extremely shallow DOF worked with that one...

Hmmm. The footage is " alright ". The adaptor stuff indeed had a weird bokeh that I didn't find pleasing.
The other stuff was good, but I'd recommend making the war movie a lot brighter. It's too dark to see any detail.
I'm definitely more interested in a 35 mm. sensor.
Thanks for showing your work. "not bad"

[Sem Skywalker]

If you do not see that Red Scarlet, no mather how it ends up, is FAR, FAR ahead of all these money-loving companies which only give u what they have to, and not what they CAN give you, you are lost in this.... Editing RAW instead of time-compressed MPEG2 og MPEG4 gives you almost the playgroud of real film. 30p is neither any consideration of people wanting to maybe ultimately show their finished films in a cinema some time in the future (digital projectors can show it, but it does not give the real feel of film, so it is no option for many).

The rolling shutter problem is far less on the Red's than on any consumer camcorder, and the dynamic range so much higher. Just continue playing around with these HDV- and AVCHD-compressing (or any other timebased compression with low dynamic range) toys. They are okay if you do not aim for something really great in the future.... The Sony HVR-ZI costs almost 10000 here, and it not good for color correction at all. I will buy no camera until the Scarlet arrives, fixed or not. DOF is not the main point of a movie. If people do not see what to focus on, you are lost anyways.... "Star Wars" had almost no DOF, people loved and understood it anyways.

Problem with compression is that many, like my self, are distracted by the image artifacts themselves, and do not get the experience they could. HV20 (and those after it from Canon) is great, but they do not give great indie filmmakers the possibilities they actually deserve. How much money you have, does not tell how good you are.

Quality matters, otherwise why don't you just throw away your HDTV and watch everything on YouTube and Vimeo and such? And talking of 3k being too big. Have anyone said there won't be 1080p/1080i/720p25/30/720p50/60 options? Everything is possible, that is what is so great with Red, they understand that! You do not need to standarize to do something.

Rendertime is no problem for people putting their soul in this, image quality can very much be.... You do not need to take every step, you CAN jump over 42 steps if you want, no one can order you not to, if you have that ability. They can try to drag you back "in line"/down, but you do not need to let them....

[booggerg]

The rolling shutter problem is far less on the Red's than on any consumer camcorder, and the dynamic range so much higher. Just continue playing around with these HDV- and AVCHD-compressing (or any other timebased compression with low dynamic range) toys.

Rhetoric question: Have you seen footage from the 2/3 Scarlet?

Or are you talking about the Red One and future S35 or FF models? Well then you are definitely paying appropriately for them. At that price, you shouldn't compare it to HDV and AVCHD "toys"

[Braceface]

If you do not see that Red Scarlet, no mather how it ends up, is FAR, FAR ahead of all these money-loving companies which only give u what they have to, and not what they CAN give you, you are lost in this.... Editing RAW instead of time-compressed MPEG2 og MPEG4 gives you almost the playgroud of real film. 30p is neither any consideration of people wanting to maybe ultimately show their finished films in a cinema some time in the future (digital projectors can show it, but it does not give the real feel of film, so it is no option for many).

The rolling shutter problem is far less on the Red's than on any consumer camcorder, and the dynamic range so much higher. Just continue playing around with these HDV- and AVCHD-compressing (or any other timebased compression with low dynamic range) toys. They are okay if you do not aim for something really great in the future.... The Sony HVR-ZI costs almost 10000 here, and it not good for color correction at all. I will buy no camera until the Scarlet arrives, fixed or not. DOF is not the main point of a movie. If people do not see what to focus on, you are lost anyways.... "Star Wars" had almost no DOF, people loved and understood it anyways.

Problem with compression is that many, like my self, are distracted by the image artifacts themselves, and do not get the experience they could. HV20 (and those after it from Canon) is great, but they do not give great indie filmmakers the possibilities they actually deserve. How much money you have, does not tell how good you are.

Quality matters, otherwise why don't you just throw away your HDTV and watch everything on YouTube and Vimeo and such? And talking of 3k being too big. Have anyone said there won't be 1080p/1080i/720p25/30/720p50/60 options? Everything is possible, that is what is so great with Red, they understand that! You do not need to standarize to do something.

Rendertime is no problem for people putting their soul in this, image quality can very much be.... You do not need to take every step, you CAN jump over 42 steps if you want, no one can order you not to, if you have that ability. They can try to drag you back "in line"/down, but you do not need to let them....

Quality is important. Thats why I don't want the Scarlet at 3000 dollars.
The basic Scarlet is a let-down without a 35mm sensor, interchangeable lenses, and a "complete" camera. It's a no brainer, err.... wait it's an only the brainer, lol. Just give me a whole camera... THEY are the ones that led people to believe that was in the works for under 3500 dollars. At least they never disputed, or stopped the rumors on their forum, which I find them responsible for. Instead of quelling the wild rumors they let the theories grow. That in my estimation is almost as good as confirming them. Not as good, but almost as good as.
They should scrap the Scarlet. Maybe they will. Maybe they'll scrap the epic in 2 years. The whole Obsolescence of Obsolete deal. It's too bad technology doesn't work like that, lol.

[Ian-T]

Once again: Image resolution is not related to image quality. Pixel/Sensor size is related to image quality.

..

You said that twice. What do you mean by image quality? When you say IQ are you suggesting "better?" If had had the biggest sensor (and most pixels) in the room but outputted to 720x480...would that make my picture look "better" than an A1 outputting in its native 1440x1080? I'm only asking a question and not making any statements... I suppose latitude wise I'd be superior...but in the end...it would still just be a Standard Definition image....right?

[Halsu]

the movie had a few scenes where I used auto settings. Those were without the adaptor, in a couple of the roof-mounted boom scenes. I'm sure you can guess why I used automatic for those....
Other than those, there is no "pumping".

Yes there is - i.e. in the scene that starts around 1'39'' when the white shirted girl walks first in the shadows and then comes to sunlight etc. It's both overblown and pumping... another pretty strong example is the bulrry wide angle shop interior at around 8'00''.

There's lots of other places, but these were the ones that catched my attention the most.

OFCOURSE, a siht load of the scenes had blown out back-grounds, and I HOPE you can guess why.....

You wouldn't like my guess ;-)

I didn't watch the whole film, but in the parts i watched there were many overblown scenes that shouldn't be a problem for HV20. It has a pretty damn good dynamic range actually.

I didn't put it in my rules of engagement plan to only shoot when the sun was "just right" for a road movie with no budget. It wouldn't be practical with my budget, and the audience never mentions that as a problem, only a few people from this forum.

Shooting in bright sunshine is not a problem at all with HV20, you don't need to overexpose to get details in the shadows, if you set up the camera properly.

I'm pretty sure that you wouldn't get any better results with D5 MKII, unless you modify the way you shoot.

but for what I had to work with NOBODY has really done it to that degree and posted it on this forum. It was very extreme. Perfect, hell no.

I'm sure it was a massive effort for you - but trust me, i know what it is to work with a small crew too.

*******

I guess you didn't have a look at the clips i posted in this message (don't wanna link to the video twice):
http://hv20.com/showthread.php?t=17729&page=10#243

...i assume no-one else watched it either, 'cause no-one commented.

One of the clips is parts of a DVD extra recreation of a scene that was left out from a WWII feature film, made for a mini documentary about one of the characters. There's some shots in there that were taken in direct sunlight - no blowouts. Also, the "Brothell" clips have examples of native HV20 DOF - to my eye, it's "cinematic enough", i wouldn't want more. The shots were also strongly color corrected to match the film's look - this scene takes place at dawn, we shot in daylight.

We shot that 10 minute partly dramatized documentary with HV20 in two days - one for exteriors, one for interiors, with a two man camera crew and just a few small lamps. There was an additional one hour shoot for an interview, but that was it.

[Ian-T]

u guys crack me up....

Actually Halsu....I didn't even notice your link ealier. I think this thread is moviing so fast that folks might have just missed it. Will check it out though...