Jump to content


Photo

RED - Epic and Scarlet


  • Please log in to reply
112 replies to this topic

#1 Matt Workman

Matt Workman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • NYC

Posted 13 November 2008 - 10:41 PM

Hey Guys,

For those of you who haven't heard about the new RED Nov. 13th announcement of the new Epic and Scarlet specs you should definitely check this out:

http://www.red.com/epic_scarlet/

This is going to make things very interesting. I'm honestly overwhelmed with this information. For my general work (music videos and commercials) the Epic 5k and Red 4k SS-35mm sensors are good enough.

Very interested in how Hasselblad and Mamiya will react to the new large format and 645 cameras. D2/D3 were about $20-30k last I checked.

The mini primes are the cutest things I've ever seen in my life. Can't wait to see their T1.9 S35mm primes also. I've heard great things about the 18-80mm T2.9 zoom also. Even crazier is the 647 and large format primes they are coming out with.

I can't help but think its too much at once, but hey. The new viewfinders and handheld kits look great. And the new modularity to make very small or very big rigs is an AC's wet dream.

Enough rant.

Cheers,

Matt
  • 0

#2 Matt Workman

Matt Workman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • NYC

Posted 13 November 2008 - 10:44 PM

We just need RED follow focus, RED mattebox, RED tripods, RED dollies/cranes, RED lights and they'll have to break up the monopoly. :ph34r: I'll regret posting this later on. :P
  • 0

#3 Matt Workman

Matt Workman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • NYC

Posted 13 November 2008 - 10:50 PM

Seriously the last reply to my own post, but the new RED 35mm primes look a lot like cookes and are T2.0, thats all I'll say.

Posted Image
  • 0

#4 Chance Shirley

Chance Shirley
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 256 posts
  • Director

Posted 13 November 2008 - 11:22 PM

Yawn. Vaporware.
  • 0

#5 Jay Taylor

Jay Taylor
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 122 posts
  • Student
  • Nashville, TN

Posted 14 November 2008 - 12:00 AM

Hey,

Remember, when the Red One was announced I believe it was supposed to be 4.5k, up to 60fps. Turns out it's 4k up to 30fps. Also, as of right now, the epic and scarlet "modules" are, for all we know, nothing but renders. I'm assuming they don't have any prototypes, but there's really no basis for my assumption.

I'd bet that some of these options will disappear before any of it actually ships. Truthfully, as much as I like the idea of a full frame, vistavision, sized sensor, I doubt very many people will be going for that option. And honestly, how many people are actually going to buy that 28k sensor? 645 sensor seems strange, too?


Jay
  • 0

#6 dan brockett

dan brockett
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 66 posts
  • Producer

Posted 14 November 2008 - 12:04 AM

We just need RED follow focus, RED mattebox, RED tripods, RED dollies/cranes, RED lights and they'll have to break up the monopoly. :ph34r: I'll regret posting this later on. :P


Hey Matt:

There is a RED dolly, but Matthews makes it. I just did a story on it for www.hdvideopro.com it will be in the December '08 issue. Pretty sweet dolly.

http://www.msegrip.c...oducts_ID=26766

Dan
  • 0

#7 Matt Workman

Matt Workman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • NYC

Posted 14 November 2008 - 12:14 AM

Dan: Cool. I don't get that magazine though :( There is the Angeniuex RED Optimos too :)
Actually, in the brochure I've heard they are coming out with the RED Matte Box and I'd assume a RED follow focus as well.

Chance: Thanks. <_<

Jay: Definitely a legitimate concern but even if they delivered 1/2 of the specs they just announced that would be news. I'm not claiming its going to revolutionize filmmaking, but its still interesting to hear the new specs, even if they aren't exactly what is delivered.

I have no current need for a 645/67 format camera, but I've already heard some interesting uses for the camera, especially for VFX etc. Though their new strategy seems to be to compete with Hasselblad and Mamiya in their digital stills market.

There is plenty of positive and excited feedback on the red forum, but I'm interested in what they guys here have to say. Negative or positive, just more opinions.

Matt

Edited by Matt Workman, 14 November 2008 - 12:15 AM.

  • 0

#8 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7116 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 14 November 2008 - 05:18 AM

I feel the problem of their larger format systems is that they are still compressed. I highly doubt a Hasselblad has any compression on it's raws. . . Till then, as I said, kudos to them for pushing the game a bit now it's time to wait and see how each of their new systems deals with the real world in the next coming months.
  • 0

#9 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5069 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 November 2008 - 01:03 PM

I didn't know there was a monopoly in such items as tripods (although some brands are owned by the same company) dollies and cranes The 3rd party manufacturers come up with higher quality accessories for the ONE compared to RED themselves, so I wouldn't get too excited by RED bringing out matte boxes etc just at this stage. You've got to compare them to other brands.

An increased market size for certain items of camera kit does allow the manufacturers to produce in larger batch sizes, which will reduce the unit costs. Anyway, I'd wait and see who makes these new lenses, just because something looks similar to something doesn't mean it actually is the same. RED have been quiet so far about who makes their current glassware.
  • 0

#10 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 14 November 2008 - 02:21 PM

I think the modular approach is a great idea, it allows more personalization of your camera gear and it allows RED to update & redesign modules over the years rather than replace elements in whole bodies.

Of course, it all reminds me a bit of the SI-2K design approach, just on steroids... but I think it's smart.

I personally don't see the need to jump from a 5K S35 sensor, PL-mount choice to a 6K FF35 (like VistaVision) choice with a still camera lens mount. I just don't think an extra 1K is worth losing two more stops of effective depth of field over 35mm cine combined with losing the ability to use cine lenses. Doubling the effective area of the sensor but not getting double the resolution (unlike when doubling the size of a film negative)... unless there is some advantage in terms of dynamic range and noise that follows as a result.

I also don't really see the new cameras seriously challenging Nikon and Canon in the still camera market. Most still photographers don't need a video camera at super high resolutions, and the prices of the high-end Nikon and Canon cameras are still cheaper in general than what RED is planning on offering, so this new approach seems tailored for a very small market that needs both high resolution digital cinema images and still camera images. On the other hand, for a filmmaker who wants to own their own gear, I suppose it's cool to take the body and lenses you are planning to use on your feature out on a location scout and take still pictures with it.
  • 0

#11 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 14 November 2008 - 02:30 PM

I'd bet that some of these options will disappear before any of it actually ships. Truthfully, as much as I like the idea of a full frame, vistavision, sized sensor, I doubt very many people will be going for that option. And honestly, how many people are actually going to buy that 28k sensor? 645 sensor seems strange, too…


Jay

There's nothing like that big VV frame except a 5-perf 65mm, ifyou can afford to shoot on 65mm. I looked at 3 and 4 perf negatives and had a good laugh.

Even if they , digital mfg, come out with a sensor as big, you still have the digital problems. Do they use lots of small pixels with high noise? or big pixels with a sensor twice as big? or try to use a kind of super-pixel sub-sampling? There's only so much you can do with a wavelet, Haar, or any other transform.

as for the advertising junk, big deal if i had the time or inclination to crank up inventor, i could make images like that, but you have to give it to JJ, what a marketing machine. i listened to kfi and the leo the tech guy (who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground IMHO), "yeah right" basically read off the marketing garbage, $20K, end of film, blah, blah, blah.

Edited by Glen Alexander, 14 November 2008 - 02:34 PM.

  • 0

#12 Glen Alexander

Glen Alexander
  • Guests

Posted 14 November 2008 - 02:35 PM

I'd bet that some of these options will disappear before any of it actually ships. Truthfully, as much as I like the idea of a full frame, vistavision, sized sensor, I doubt very many people will be going for that option. And honestly, how many people are actually going to buy that 28k sensor? 645 sensor seems strange, too…


Jay

There's nothing like that big VV frame except a 5-perf 65mm, ifyou can afford to shoot on 65mm. I looked at 3 and 4 perf negatives and had a good laugh.

Even if they , digital mfg, come out with a sensor as big, you still have the digital problems. Do they use lots of small pixels with high noise? or big pixels with a sensor twice as big? or try to use a kind of super-pixel sub-sampling? There's only so much you can do with a wavelet, Haar, or any other transform.
  • 0

#13 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 14 November 2008 - 03:53 PM

There are a few things that I'm very skeptical about with their release of information.

The one that really glares out at me is that their proposed viewfinder for all those high resolution formats is still only 1080P. What good is a 1080P viewfinder when you're trying to work with medium format or a medium format panoramic format like 6x17? I've been saying it with the RED but they really will need an optical viewfinder at this point. We can't be waiting to download footage to check sharps, the operator (or somebody, at least) has to be able to see the actual image resolution at the time of capture.

Second, will anyone really use those larger formats to shoot movies? You're getting above the established release resolutions. You lose the ability to work with high-quality cinema lenses, which I feel is a huge loss. If theater digital projection is going to be set at 2k or 4k, it seems like the VistaVision-size 6K should be more than enough for movie production and for the larger formats they should just be concentrating on competing with all of the well-established stills cameras available.

Third, the modular approach is a great idea. It could make upgrading the system infinitely easier and cheaper. The danger, as I see it, is in how exactly they design the parts. Modular stuff has a tendency to be somewhat less pleasant to use than equipment designed for one purpose and one purpose alone. RED hasn't even designed one great camera, IMO. Why should I believe they can pull this off without the same kind of problems the RED still has but exponentially worse?

One final thing I just thought of: the software. Will the user be able to tailor the software to their own use of the camera? I know as a 1st AC I really don't want to have to dig through all of those options pertaining to stills capture if we're never going to use it on set. I think the software that gets loaded into the camera has to be somewhat modular, too, to keep it from being unwieldy and annoying.
  • 0

#14 Thomas James

Thomas James
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 14 November 2008 - 06:33 PM

I think it will be pretty cool to have massive resolutions like 65 megapixels or over 200 megapixels because then the projectionist will become a "cinematographer in post" because he will be able to zoom in on the shots and be able to frame and compose the shots while he is doing the projection.
  • 0

#15 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 14 November 2008 - 07:04 PM

I think it will be pretty cool to have massive resolutions like 65 megapixels or over 200 megapixels because then the projectionist will become a "cinematographer in post" because he will be able to zoom in on the shots and be able to frame and compose the shots while he is doing the projection.


That doesn't sound cool at all. A pimply kid at a multiplex f-ing around with a cinematographer's work in a public show. Awesome.
  • 0

#16 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5069 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 November 2008 - 07:17 PM

I think it will be pretty cool to have massive resolutions like 65 megapixels or over 200 megapixels because then the projectionist will become a "cinematographer in post" because he will be able to zoom in on the shots and be able to frame and compose the shots while he is doing the projection.


The projectionist managing to keep the projector in focus would be an even better idea.
  • 0

#17 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 14 November 2008 - 07:28 PM

I just don't think an extra 1K is worth losing two more stops of effective depth of field over 35mm cine combined with losing the ability to use cine lenses. Doubling the effective area of the sensor but not getting double the resolution (unlike when doubling the size of a film negative)... unless there is some advantage in terms of dynamic range and noise that follows as a result.


Yes, that's it. They gain some dynamic range and lose some noise by going to bigger photosites. Enough to be worthwhile? We'll have to wait and see.




-- J.S.
  • 0

#18 Tom Lowe

Tom Lowe
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1211 posts
  • Director
  • somewhere worshipping Terrence Malick

Posted 14 November 2008 - 08:04 PM

I think the modular approach is a great idea, it allows more personalization of your camera gear and it allows RED to update & redesign modules over the years rather than replace elements in whole bodies.

Of course, it all reminds me a bit of the SI-2K design approach, just on steroids... but I think it's smart.

I personally don't see the need to jump from a 5K S35 sensor, PL-mount choice to a 6K FF35 (like VistaVision) choice with a still camera lens mount. I just don't think an extra 1K is worth losing two more stops of effective depth of field over 35mm cine combined with losing the ability to use cine lenses. Doubling the effective area of the sensor but not getting double the resolution (unlike when doubling the size of a film negative)... unless there is some advantage in terms of dynamic range and noise that follows as a result.

I also don't really see the new cameras seriously challenging Nikon and Canon in the still camera market. Most still photographers don't need a video camera at super high resolutions, and the prices of the high-end Nikon and Canon cameras are still cheaper in general than what RED is planning on offering, so this new approach seems tailored for a very small market that needs both high resolution digital cinema images and still camera images. On the other hand, for a filmmaker who wants to own their own gear, I suppose it's cool to take the body and lenses you are planning to use on your feature out on a location scout and take still pictures with it.


I agree that these cameras will probably have very, very little impact on the DSLR market. The 5D Mark II is about to break all sales records. It's an amazing DSLR.

But I have to think that Epic -- whether S35 or FF35 -- is going to have a huge impact on the cinema market. The fact that Red is putting out these cameras with such stunning specs -- and pricing them less than a Varicam and maybe 1/4 of the price of Sony's 1080p cameras -- must have execs at Panavision and Sony extremely worried.
  • 0

#19 Keith Walters

Keith Walters
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2219 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 14 November 2008 - 08:20 PM

That doesn't sound cool at all. A pimply kid at a multiplex f-ing around with a cinematographer's work in a public show. Awesome.


Yes, that's the sort of notion worthy of Reduser.

Considering also the number of productions where the distribution contract specifically prohibits pan 'n' scan display on TV :lol:

Actually all DVD players have letterbox and pan 'n' scan options, but I can't recall seeing a single movie where the pan 'n' scan option could be activated!
  • 0

#20 Gus Sacks

Gus Sacks
  • Sustaining Members
  • 287 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 14 November 2008 - 10:13 PM

But I have to think that Epic -- whether S35 or FF35 -- is going to have a huge impact on the cinema market. The fact that Red is putting out these cameras with such stunning specs -- and pricing them less than a Varicam and maybe 1/4 of the price of Sony's 1080p cameras -- must have execs at Panavision and Sony extremely worried.


While I understand owner/operators are a large part of their market, I don't exactly see rental houses being able to keep up with this game... or want to play it, necessarily. With all the different modular pieces, do you really think they'll want to sink 100s of thousands of dollars into everything, so the DP can piece together his own ultra-unique package?
  • 0


Visual Products

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Opal

FJS International, LLC

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Tai Audio

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Technodolly

CineLab

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

CineTape

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

The Slider

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

CineLab

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets