Now that I got your attention ;).

The RED scarlet has been erased... well.. everything that we have been told.. articles.. conventions.. all gone because of the new market. The whole thing is being revamped. tune in for a big surprise!

source? RED site.

We have changed everything about Scarlet because the market has changed and we have discovered a lot of things in the process. We have a new vision.

Wipe you minds of the past announced Scarlet. Forget the design and forget the price. It is all different now. We think you will be surprised. Glad we didn't take any deposits... :-)

Jim

Yeah, there are dslr cameras out there now that do what the scarlet was going to...and RED wants to lead the pack, not follow. I can't wait to see what they're doing to it :)

Ok, now that I've read up on what a DSLR camera is, is there any difference in video quality between a DSLR and a Digicam? I'm probably making a laughable mistake, but the only difference I was able to understand between the two was with the way the image is presented in the viewfinder? Does this make a difference to videographers? What am I missing? What is the all the hoopla and adverts I see for this RED thing?

In this case, DSLR refers to a digital still camera, but they've added video capabilities to them. Canon recently released a camera that competes with the advertised specs of the scarlet.

The RED One, their first big show stopping camera competes against big hollywood film cameras, but digital instead of film.

Here are some examples of the beautiful pix/vids it can take: http://redrelay.net/

The scarlet is poised to be the 16mm digital equivalent of that movement. At a $3k price point and 3k horizontal resolution, it would have proved awesome... but now, Mr. Jannard is giving it the once over to make it compete better against the DSLR field. Should be cool.

OK, cool, thanks for the basic break down, all I could tell by the website was that at $17K just for the camera body itself, it oughta be a damn good camera! But with this price tag, I don't see this as a common camera amongst Indie film producers, unless it's a good sized Indie company. Probably not a good camera for the Indie just starting out, looks like you could hurt yourself with it (or someone else). :)

OK, cool, thanks for the basic break down, all I could tell by the website was that at $17K just for the camera body itself, it oughta be a damn good camera! But with this price tag, I don't see this as a common camera amongst Indie film producers, unless it's a good sized Indie company. Probably not a good camera for the Indie just starting out, looks like you could hurt yourself with it (or someone else). :)
Well I think an Arri 3 costs around $40,000 and is quite common, so I could see this being owned by DPs, and rented as a lower cost option to film cameras.

DSLR... like the new canon 5d with video feature? Dont tell me people are going to start running around shooting indy films with those lol.

Knightly: I saw the footage of the red from the site you showed and that was ridiculous! You think scarlet will shoot pretty pictures like that? Is it time for me to sell my xh-a1? O_o to jump on this new scarlet wagon?

If you look at the digital pro options out there like the Sony Altavistas that lucas used on ATOC and Rodriguez uses, they're going for 60k... the 17,5 is actually really affordable compared to the competition, and they don't shoot as high a resolution or have an actual 35mm chip in them.

The scarlet excites me... especially if it fulfills that middle market that it's targeting the same way the red fills its market.

I could see a production company buying a bunch of them, then handing them out to projects they greenlight, forgoing so much cost of film stock and camera rental. Either pumping that $$$ into the productions, more productions or taking it in higher profits (good for the business). Potentially, this will increase the number of projects being done, giving the consumers better selection and allowing more artistic projects to be pursued... ending the dearth of "original" stories being told. More risk becomes more affordable and the studios can experiment a little bit.

That makes sense. You think that its better than the A1? the A1 seems pretty versatile with all its manual controls. If you had an A1 would you swap?

Don't know, scarlet's not out yet ;)

Well the Scarlet will be fully manual, and if it fulfils half it's promises it'll be ten times the camera the A1 is.

If we're talking about big picture, its probably a tossup whether to switch. If I had to lean in a direction, I would say if it came down to picture quality, the Scarlet will most likely produce a better overall picture with a shallower DOF, BUT it most likely will not have anywhere near the amount of controls that the A1 has.

To be quite honest, either camera is going to produce a very nice picture for HD displays, and a capable cameraman/DP is going to be able to produce a lovely exposure on either camera. Neither one is going to rival a 4k camera in terms of capability or professionalism... or price for that matter.

But just remember, a good camera is an important part, but not THE most important part. There are a lot of good cameras. There aren't many independent films with good story, characters, plot, acting, directing, foley, score, costuming, etc. Focus more on those and you'll find that you'll have many good cameras to choose from probably for free or next to free.

I agree Wideshot. ITs not the camera, but everything else that goes into a film.

The only thing that concerns me, is if the Scarlet is superior to the A1, and I have the ability to swap to the next generation of technology, why not? Before the A1 deteriorates in price, then I cant swap to the next best thing.

You may end up having to upgrade your system to handle the added resolution. The cost of upgrade may be greater than it looks immediately.

Any old computer can handle the resolution of RED cameras. They judder at 4k even on high end macbooks, but you don't need to view the footage at that. 3k footage runs well on high end computers, and 2k is viewable on anything a year old or so.

Also, wideshot, what makes you think that the Scarlet won't have as many features as the A1? I don't understand what you're basing this on when all we have currently to compare to is the RED camera which has all the features and HD camera would need.

what about the storage space? More than HD I would assume.

what about the storage space? More than HD I would assume.

Physical storage space or recording space?

hard drive space.

The Scarlet, assuming it hasn't been modified in that department, hot swaps 8GB or 16GB compact flash cards. The 32GB cards will be released at around the same time. Shooting on Red One gives you around 5 minutes recording time. So 16gb will give you around ten and 32gb about 20 or so. That's 40 minutes recording time before you have to change a card, but it's continuous as it hot swaps between them similar to P2.

RED isn't stupid, much of the revolution behind the RED one was the Redcode RAW. They know that if they bring out the scarlet and it's not very usable because there is no way to store the footage and you can't shoot for very long that it won't do very well. They are very clever and won't overlook the prosumer nature of the camera.

I agree Wideshot. ITs not the camera, but everything else that goes into a film.

I agree with the both of you. There are alot of people (present company excluded of course) who think that HD will make them a better filmmaker. Hey, if you shoot crappy footage, you just have crappy footage with beautiful clarity.


About the RED....


The Scarlet, assuming it hasn't been modified in that department, hot swaps 8GB or 16GB compact flash cards. The 32GB cards will be released at around the same time. Shooting on Red One gives you around 5 minutes recording time. So 16gb will give you around ten and 32gb about 20 or so. That's 40 minutes recording time before you have to change a card, but it's continuous as it hot swaps between them similar to P2.

When you say "hot swaps", what do you mean? When you say "40 minutes recording time before you have to change, but its continuous," does that mean you can't stop down to change the card? :huh:

-- spinner :cool:

Umm. Before you revived this old thread, RED One rental, the last post was 10-12-2008. The camera in which they were discussing in future tense actually has it's specs available @ http://www.red.com/epic_scarlet/. The site has pricing for all Epic and Scarlet products and has a release date slated for mid-2009.

In this case, DSLR refers to a digital still camera, but they've added video capabilities to them. Canon recently released a camera that competes with the advertised specs of the scarlet.

The RED One, their first big show stopping camera competes against big hollywood film cameras, but digital instead of film.

Here are some examples of the beautiful pix/vids it can take: http://redrelay.net/

The scarlet is poised to be the 16mm digital equivalent of that movement. At a $3k price point and 3k horizontal resolution, it would have proved awesome... but now, Mr. Jannard is giving it the once over to make it compete better against the DSLR field. Should be cool.



Hey there

Could you clarify which cameras are already out there doing what the scarlet was supposed to be doing? It seemed like a pretty darn good camera to me.
Since I'm here, could anyone suggest if any camera like the scarlet is coming out and when? I'm writing a feasibility study for a feature and stuff like that would be real helpful to me

Thanks

I LOVE the short FEEL MY PAIN. Amazingly well-produced. Beautifully shot.

This is a perfect example of how a RED can--with proper skill behind it--rival a true Hollywood film. In my eyes, it looks just as good.

Check out this short: http://www.redrelay.net/owners/0098/films/FMP_WebSD_CC.mov

I think it's totally worth the investment to pick up a 2K or 4K camera that allows for adapters and lenses. They are expensive, yes, but they are only a fraction of the cost of a standard 35mm...a fraction. If you are a production company that is serious about making features and selling them...it would be wise to invest in a camera on the level with RED.

Ok, now that I've read up on what a DSLR camera is, is there any difference in video quality between a DSLR and a Digicam? I'm probably making a laughable mistake, but the only difference I was able to understand between the two was with the way the image is presented in the viewfinder? Does this make a difference to videographers? What am I missing? What is the all the hoopla and adverts I see for this RED thing?

Stu Maschwitz (of 'DV Rebel's Guide and Magic Bullet fame) has bloged about DSLR's and shot test etc. He has a great blog check it out. He covers the weakness of the format and how you're better off buying a HD camera- if you're shooting video. From what I've seen he's one of the more experienced guys with this technology (Cannon D5) and been working with it for about a year (before it was on the market)

http://prolost.com/blog/2009/3/25/attention-canon-nikon-video-dslrs-are-not-for-who-you-think.html

In my market a RED One rents for about $1200 a day (by the time you get all the bits you need. They advertise it at $495 a day, but that's just the body). My understanding is you have to book it about 6 months in advance.