Scarlet What You Will
Wednesday, December 15, 2010 at 12:22AM Be a fanboy or be a skeptic, but there’s a working fixed-lens RED Scarlet on this very planet.
Interesting times, these. We’ve got inexpensive 35mm-ish cameras rife with artifacts, a couple of reasonably-priced not-quite-35mm camera with great features, and a 35mm PL-mount camera with a price perhaps not befitting its consumer codec. Add to the mix a 3K raw-shooter with RED’s impeccable codec and the promise of some juicy frame rates, but a 2/3” sensor that seems positively tiny these days and a conveniently-cybernetic, but love-it-or-leave-it lens. Will Scarlet find love from folks more concerned about frame rates, latitude, and gradability than with depth of field so shallow you have to choose which eye is sharp? Will such shooters be content with a finite set of focal lengths, in exchange for a presumably reasonable price-point?
Sometimes even remembering that last year’s Academy Award winner for Cinematography was shot on 2/3” sensors and the Best Picture winner was shot largely on Super 16mm isn’t enough to quel that nagging feeling that bigger is better, even if it’s bigger, softer, and sizzlier.
RED is betting that you like some sanity with your cinematography. Do you?
Reader Comments (28)
I predict the will be have tonne of 35mm adapter for the Scarlet, or a big surprise from RED with a bigger sensor.
@Vincent - I think that any but the very most expensive super 35mm adapters will be rubbish for Scarlet - the ground glass would just be throwing away your resolution. They work on 1080p cameras that resolve resolutions somewhere over 720p, but on a 3K sensor resolving more than 2K of detail, a lot of that extra resolution will just be wasted capturing the grains on the ground glass instead of the image projected on it.
But that is beside the point. If you're trying to use a 35mm on Scarlet, then you're probably an idiot. 2/3" has far shallower DOF than 1/3" or 1/2" sensors - it's just like stopping a 35mm lens to f/4.5 - f/5, which is more than enough for the majority of setups...
i don't say i'll use the scarlet with dof adapter but in france lot a tv show 35mmdof with 1/3 or 2/3 sensor camera. I gues like the HVX200 and the Z1 & EX1 lotof guys will use a dot with the scarlet.
If I could buy it within the next month, I might be tempted- but I have an AF101 on order, and that seems like the right camera for me at this moment in time. I don't need 3K: my main output is the web anyway- at 3 Mbps H.264 720p, as many of my customers don't even have full HD monitors, let alone 3K monitors! If I find the AVCHD cripples the camera, I can add a Nanoflash. At cost, admittedly, but maybe not so much more than a fully-kitted Scarlet will come to and there are lower cost things like the Ninja in the pipeline.
Ditto the various Sony options in the works. Probably nice, but can't buy them soon enough for my next round of shoots and the one coming out first is out of my price range (I'm spending the extra on glass, LED lighting for roving shoots, better sound kit and a heap of talent and location fees).
I was sold on the AF101 as soon as I went to a demo and got my hands on one. It is exactly the forcible insertion of a large sensor into my HVX200 that I was hoping for. 4/3 seems like the sweet spot for allowing both deep and shallow focus- I have an f/0.95 Voightlander on order and if I don't like it or I want something wider... I can just change lens. The micro 4/3 mount with the shallow flange is great for using any old glass you can lay hands on, looking forward to experimenting.
I'm really fired up to get shooting and get back to the pure hedonistic pleasure of using a real video camera with real video camera ergonomics (and XLR!!!) after the purgatory of the 5D2/7D/overheat-dislodged-sound-jack-no-monitoring-torture-a-thon.
If RED really does the business and makes cameras I can actually buy at a price I can afford which blow away the AF101- well, I'll probably still get a good year of great footage from the Panasonic :-)
You forgot the best out of the new cameras: the Drama.
Uncompressed 12 bit RAW on cheap of-the-shelf HDs - beautiful skin tones because of film emulation - "only" 2/3 chip but great DOF can be achieved with super fast, super sharp, cheap c-mount lenses.
In my book, the Drama is damed close to the Holy Grail of cameras.
Here is some writeup on the prototype (still in a R&D housing).
http://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/2010/08/09/uncompressed-hd-recording-the-new-drama-hd-camera-finally-comes-to-life/
Frank
I'm disappointed to say the least. The form factor looks like an oversized DSLR. I've seen photos before, but seeing someone film with it just makes it more apparent. I was really hoping for more innovation there.
When they had the idea for it, they wanted to make a pocket camera that amateurs could use out of the box. That's what got a lot of people excited. Now it's completely shifted into a gimped Red One that has arguable more or less features than a DSLR.
I definitely see pros using this as a backup cam to their Red, but it's hard to justify buying this if you're on a tight budget when you can get a 60D and a slew of lenses for under $2000.
I have been shooting on super 16 for the past month and with a nice set of fast lenses you can get fairly shallow depth of field, I've had a set of super speeds and even at fairly wide angles I've got decently shallow depth of field. And even with a T2.6 Cooke zoom I can get decently shallow depth of field: But I think shallow depth of field is just a fad, I think this whole one eye in one eye out of focus thing will blow over. I'm already pretty over it, as long as I can throw my background out of focus for dialogue scenes I'm happy. That being said though I am buying an Epic but I may pick up a fixed lens scarlet if they are reasonably priced.
The 2/3" inch chip is vital to RED's ultimate goal of creating a camera system with interchangeable parts which can create cine-professional level motion and still content for all uses. To get this they would like 2/3", s35, FF35 and eventually large format sensors. 2/3" is ideal for green screen or any special effect shot where you need tracking markers. I think it will be preferred for documentary, where a wider depth of field helps you get your shots.
I love shallow depth of field as much as the next film nerd, but the razor thin closeup shots that look great on TV or a computer can be overwhelming when projected on a big screen. The option to go deeper by swapping out your epic "brain" for a scarlet "brain" will be chosen by a fair amount of D.P.'s for many different reasons. The individual project needs will dictate the usage... and we will have the options.
3 or 4 years ago, this would have been interesting to me for my creative work. But the fixed lens is a bigger issue for me vs. sensor size. I do like my 7D near 35mm motion picture size but the real big thing for me is lens choices. Ever since buying an XL1 in 1999 with the only three lenses available (the manual lens, the horrid servo factory and wide lenses) and waiting for the vaporware "Canon XL1 primes", lens choice is what I love about photography and cinematography.
Sure Avatar won an Oscar, but the to me, there were far better shot films than Avatar. Oscar often does not equal "great" or even "good".
And for high end client jobs, not a ideal B camera for Red/Epic because of lens limitations. It's okay but ideally, you want to match glass for B/second unit. As well as DOF matching for B cameras.
And call me a skeptic, but sure, this is an actual camera, but it's not exactly the same as "fully functional", "price listed" and most importantly, shipping in ready to shoot (and post) form.
Of course, I was DP on $19,000 feature shot with HV20 and 30's that just premiered last month (Hellphone), so sometimes you shoot with what you have to to get something made. But Scarlet appears to have the lost the value war, so not sure what niche it fills at this point.
Call me a fan boy, but the way I see it is the Scarlet is a camera for options and flexibility. 3K, sure not widely needed today, but for the future; also gives room to crop and re-frame. 120fps, more options in slow-mo, extra DR with HDRx, surpassing the DR of film, more flexibility in production and post. RAW files.. I love my 7D and have been able to get some nice grades out of it, but it just can't touch the range that an redcode raw file can give you.
And the design of the DSMC system, rig it up like a DSLR for those fast and compact shoot, or build it up to a full blow heavy weight cinema style rig.
And probably the most important factor to consider in options is the company behind it: Red Digital Cinema. With all the options and upgrades they have given to Red One users and all the interactive feedback in the user forums, I can only imagine the service and respect they'll give their Scarlet users.
My bet is on Scarlet. It's not as cheap or compact as initially stated, but with its modular design and firmware upgrades and updates from Red, I feel this will be an investment that will last me many decades.
@Zhibo Lai: How is a fixed lens camera about options and flexibility?
My priorities:
1. Digital negative w/no baked-in look. Excellent codec quality.
2. HDRx for better exposure and reduced lighting required.
3. 3K for flexibility in delivery format. Some future-proofing.
4. Low cost so I can have two or three for backup/multi-camera shooting.
5. Depth of field: 2/3" sensor will give me enough choice.
6. Professional build quality.
I'd like interchangeable lenses but will go with the first sub-$10k Scarlet in production.
Go Epic or go home. After getting used to and now relying on interchangeable lenses with HDSLR's... the only logical step-up for my game is the Epic.
@Bryan
But what if there was a lens, perchance to dream, that covered 90+% of your lens range, with all the speed, and at 90+% the lens quality of your BEST glass...
... does it mean that much to you that you CHANGE LENSES and not just spare yourself that task (and extra cleaning) and (Xenu forbid) use a "fixed" lens?
If it can do - almost identically - what your (say) FIVE other lenses do... why not give yourself a little break? You've earned it.
To those of you saying you don't need 3k because nobody has a 3k monitor....
You've missed the point.
The first thing 3k gives you is a much better resolved resolution than your 1080p cameras. 3k bayer with no line-skipping downsized to 2k/1080p looks incredible. That's what the Alexa is, by the way. It's way better than 1080p native could ever achieve from a technical standpoint. I've been a freelance graphic design/digital illustrations for 10+ years now and the rule of thumb for me (and many others) is to always work at double your intended output resolution. Why? Because gently down-rezzed images are always better looking than native. No question. In short: 3k gives you better 1080p.
The second thing 3k gives you is the ability to crop in and re-frame. With 1080p cams, you pretty much have to take what you shoot unless you plan on sacrificing technical quality or output in 720p or lower. But if you shoot 3k, you can drop about a third of your frame and still be at 2k native, no problem. That's a pretty big deal.
So yeah, may be you feel you don't NEED 3k. But you should probably care that there's a camera out there that lets you do it, because you know what? Now you have the CHOICE. And that's a good thing in my book.
The Scarlet in the video is the fixed lens.
For "35mm depth of field" zealots, you're used to interchangeable lenses. The interchangeable "Cinema" Scarlet with the same 2/3" sensor will be sold alongside RED mini-primes that will open up to shoot depth of field equivalent to S35 at a f/2.8-4 half stop.
In exchange for giving up 2 1/2 stops of depth of field, the Scarlet offers no aliasing, no moire, no feature dearth (audio, monitoring, autofocus), 2K+ resolved detail, a pristine codec and dynamic range that will make your images seem more like film than ever before.
So yes, I do like some sanity with my cinematography. Scarlet will be amazing.
3K is not 3K. 3K Bayer in Red is not 3K RGB. 3K I've shot with the Red One is very nice at 2k or 1080p but it's pretty soft on a 3K display, even with sharpening. And if you crop in on 3K Bayer, you lose pixels that you're counting on for debayering sharpness.
Red, despite all their technical speak, relies on the "3k, 4k, 5k" fudge too much to hype specs. Since 99% of us will only see our work at 2k or 1080p at best, the "3K' on Scarlet is a "nice to have" not a "revolution" or "must-have".
If Scarlet were the original 3K 120fps "pocket cam" for less than $3K US, I would put my fanboy hat on. For now, it stays off.
@Art ... I don't have the choice NOW. I may have the choice in however many months it takes Red to go from a demo box to rolling production lines and shipping cameras. As they endlessly remind us, we should count on changes happening. I have things to shoot next year, and I can't wait around for a camera without any idea when it will actually become available. Panasonic's record on shipping dates is pretty good; Red's is not. (Not to denigrate the quality of Red's products, but they are not noted for getting them out on schedule).
I take the point about downsampling. I am delivering at 720p, so shooting 1080p gives me a factor of 1.5. Not as nice as downsampling by a factor of 2, but enough to make even fairly soft footage from Canons and HVX200's look pretty crisp when downsampled appropriately. Hence, I don't NEED 3k. It would be nice, of course. As would 4:4:4 colour sampling. As you say yourself, 1080p with really intelligent downsampling and de-Bayer in camera from a higher res original might actually be close to optimal. I can't afford an Alexa, sadly.
But... all of this is moot for now, until some of these products ship. So I'm going with the one that is shipping this month, because I've got work to do, and waiting for the next sexy thing camera is a bad way to get footage in the can! ;-)
I buy the "3K delivers great 1080p" rethoric, but I don't buy the "3K is useful for cropping/reframing" idea: apart from the softness Stephen talks about, with that crop you end up using an area of the sensor that's just 0.44", which means shallow DoF is hard to get
with 2/3", 14.5mm f/1.2 is equivalent to 35mm f/2.8 on 1.6x
if you're only going to use 0.44", you need a 9.5mm f/0.77
plus it won't be sharp, so forget about cropping a 1920x1080 bit out of the original 3K
you may get away with discarding 10% of your 3K (for example, to take that boom out of the image, if it dropped a bit on your best take) and then rescaling to 1080p, but not much more
So, does anyone know if there is lens data being written to the image files? Digital cinema has been around for awhile now, and us folks in VFX still have to rely on hand-written notes, slates, lens grids and off-the-cuff comments about rough zoom lens focal lengths to aid our tracking buddies in post. Meanwhile, low-end consumer cameras have been embedding metadata in the files for more than a decade.
I hope Red at least sorts this out for their own lenses.
For me, it's ideal. Fixed lens is fine for me, I just need the 120p. Now let's hear the price.
I don't want to sound like a mindless red fanboy. However, I'm so sick of super shallow DOF it's not even funny. I know everything has its place, but at the moment i would probably refrain from shooting something at f1.2 on a 5d mk2 even if my script called for it.
I want the 2/3 scarlet so that I have deeper depth of field. Both so that it looks different from everything on vimeo, and because I want to learn to use backgrounds to tell my stories. So many of my favourite films are deep focus.
Also, more dynamic range just looks so sexy. Makes shooting outside more fun too. Precise framerate control would be fun too.
It doesn't seem meaningful to even talk about it until it really is on the market and available for purchase.
Sitting on a shelf nearby is a fantastic 70's era Nizo Super8 camera. It has a incredible fixed zoom lens that alas is unusable and completely inflexible...doomed to an outdated and largely irrelevant format. This is the fixed lens Scarlet of the past. On the same shelf is a set of lenses from the same time period that still find life all the time on modern cameras.
I believe that flexibility is key these days. Camera bodies and tech at this semi-pro price range are nearly disposable after an increasingly short time period. People want options. Its not an Ipod, They want to know that at least some of their investments will have some life past 18 months. I think that's a tangential but relevant addition as to why DSLR's have taken off...and here comes Red, giving the modern equivalent of the Nizo, the Sony Handycam, or the GH1. Cool yes...but only for now.
I'm glad their finally thinking about producing something, but to me the fixed lens is a complete non-starter. If the price is much higher than about 6K I think its gonna be a non-starter for a ton of folks as well. I don't predict you'll be seeing a ton of these on set, nor in the hands of mom and dad. It remains to be seen just how large a niche the "upper-middle" of the road is.
@ Ryan Farnes: I agree with you 100% on all points. Really looking forward to the interchangeable Scarlett 2/3" with mini primes.
nice, almost gave up on it, can someone reveal the focal length/range of that fixed lens?
I'm wondering why no one has mentioned the ikonoskop A-cam dII. Super 16mm Sensor, interchangeable lenses, shoots raw and is for sale now unlike the scarlet. I feel like people should be talking about this camera more.
http://www.ikonoskop.com/dii/footage
I'm glad I'm not currently in the market for a camera. I got my 7D the day it came out, and am loving shooting with it, have lots of work with it, and am becoming a better photographer, too!
I think that's what I like most about shooting with a DSLR... flexibility to get great-looking video and photos at the same time.
But since I'm shooting and working with my 7D and making clients happy, I'm going to hold off on buying a camera for quite a while. I'm curious what the next major round of DSLRs will offer, and what the actually-released RED products will look like/cost. Also, I have a few thousand dollars invested in Canon glass now, so that's probably going to affect any future camera purchases.